Remove (most of) the code intended for python 2 #38048
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jhaigh0
added
Maintenance
jhaigh0
force-pushed
the
remove_python_2
branch
3 times, most recently
from
c4ed2bd
to
0a6fc7c
Compare
jhaigh0
force-pushed
the
remove_python_2
branch
3 times, most recently
from
12a66c4
to
dcbff1f
Compare
jclarkeSTFC
requested changes
Oct 3, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good, just a couple of minor points. I also fired up Workbench (no errors or warnings) and tried a couple of the algorithms that have changes, worked fine, as far as I could tell.
With the changes to simpleapi might be worth considering a package build.
| @@ -527,7 +525,7 @@ def CutMD(*args, **kwargs): # noqa: C901 | |||
| return out_names[0] | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| _replace_signature(CutMD, ("\bInputWorkspace", "**kwargs")) | |||
| CutMD.__signature__ = LazyFunctionSignature(alg_name="CutMD", include_self=False) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you know why some algorithms need special treatment? E.g. CutMD and RenameWorkspace
Framework/PythonInterface/mantid/api/src/Exports/SpectrumInfoPythonIterator.cpp
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: James Clarke <139879523+jclarkeSTFC@users.noreply.github.com>
jhaigh0
force-pushed
the
remove_python_2
branch
from
2d9f3dd
to
3e8a9f4
Compare
jclarkeSTFC
previously approved these changes
Oct 8, 2024
|
👋 Hi, @jhaigh0, Conflicts have been detected against the base branch. Please rebase your branch against the base branch. |
github-actions
bot
added
the
Has Conflicts
github-actions
bot
removed
the
Has Conflicts
jclarkeSTFC
previously approved these changes
Oct 24, 2024
thomashampson
requested changes
Oct 29, 2024
Co-authored-by: thomashampson <thomas.hampson@stfc.ac.uk>
thomashampson
approved these changes
Oct 29, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description of work
Remove code which is taking precautions wrt python 2. Release 4.2.0 was the final release to support python 2, so I think there's little risk in doing this.
Also updated how
simpleapi.pywas handling function signatures as part of this.I've only searched for code by looking for comments mentioning python 2 so I'm sure there are more places out there.
There are a couple of cpp boost instances which look like they could be changed, but this is supposed to be a quick maintenance task and they look like they'd be more complex problems. Let me know if you disagree.
https://github.com/mantidproject/mantid/blob/main/Framework/PythonInterface/core/inc/MantidPythonInterface/core/PythonObjectInstantiator.h#L80-L87
https://github.com/mantidproject/mantid/blob/main/Framework/PythonInterface/mantid/kernel/src/Registry/PropertyWithValueFactory.cpp#L54-L61
There are some comments
implement with ContextDecorator after python2 is deprecated)which have been deleted. They are currently using@contextmanagerwhich is based onContextDecoratoranywayThere is no associated issue.
To test:
This does not require release notes because no user impact
Reviewer
Please comment on the points listed below (full description).
Your comments will be used as part of the gatekeeper process, so please comment clearly on what you have checked during your review. If changes are made to the PR during the review process then your final comment will be the most important for gatekeepers. In this comment you should make it clear why any earlier review is still valid, or confirm that all requested changes have been addressed.
Code Review
Functional Tests
Does everything look good? Mark the review as Approve. A member of
@mantidproject/gatekeeperswill take care of it.Gatekeeper
If you need to request changes to a PR then please add a comment and set the review status to "Request changes". This will stop the PR from showing up in the list for other gatekeepers.