Enable Python 3.10

[tonyabracadabra]

Motivation and Context

Why was this PR created?

How has this been tested?

What testing strategies have you used?

Checklist

• Read the contributing guidelines
• Opened this PR as a 'Draft Pull Request' if it is work-in-progress
• Updated the documentation to reflect the code changes
• Added a description of this change and added my name to the list of supporting contributions in the RELEASE.md file
• Added tests to cover my changes
• Assigned myself to the PR

Notice

• I acknowledge and agree that, by checking this box and clicking "Submit Pull Request":

• I submit this contribution under the Apache 2.0 license and represent that I am entitled to do so on behalf of myself, my employer, or relevant third parties, as applicable.

• I certify that (a) this contribution is my original creation and / or (b) to the extent it is not my original creation, I am authorised to submit this contribution on behalf of the original creator(s) or their licensees.

• I certify that the use of this contribution as authorised by the Apache 2.0 license does not violate the intellectual property rights of anyone else.

[oentaryorj]

Thanks for your contribution @tonyabracadabra. Can we also make sure that the unit tests for 3.9 and 3.10 below have the "required" tag (and that they run successfully)?

[tonyabracadabra]

Thanks for your contribution @tonyabracadabra. Can we also make sure that the unit tests for 3.9 and 3.10 below have the "required" tag (and that they run successfully)?

Sorry I am not sure how to make the Required tag available? Could u help me with that? I don't see any configuration differences between py3.9/3.10 vs the rest of the workflows. Thanks.

[oentaryorj]

Hi @tonyabracadabra, we can address the "required tag" later, but would you be able to fix the issues with unit_tests_310 first please? Many thanks!

[tonyabracadabra]

ok the test was not passed because of the coverage issue on line

arg_spec = inspect.getargvalues(inspect.currentframe())

I am not sure why it is not covered in testing, seems that getargvalues has been marked deprecated a while ago, I added a # pragma: no cover to make the coverage 100%, let me know if this is acceptable or not.

[oentaryorj]

ok the test was not passed because of the coverage issue on line

arg_spec = inspect.getargvalues(inspect.currentframe())

I am not sure why it is not covered in testing, seems that getargvalues has been marked deprecated a while ago, I added a # pragma: no cover to make the coverage 100%, let me know if this is acceptable or not.

Yes, this is fine. If you can suggest an alternative to this deprecated function, though, it would be great! :)

[tonyabracadabra]

ok the test was not passed because of the coverage issue on line

arg_spec = inspect.getargvalues(inspect.currentframe())

I am not sure why it is not covered in testing, seems that getargvalues has been marked deprecated a while ago, I added a # pragma: no cover to make the coverage 100%, let me know if this is acceptable or not.

Yes, this is fine. If you can suggest an alternative to this deprecated function, though, it would be great! :)

yea I've tried a couple approaches but they are either too complicated or not working as expected, so I would keep it as it is for now

[tonyabracadabra]

Will we have a release soon for the recent support on python 3.9, 3.10? @oentaryorj

[tonyabracadabra]

@GabrielAzevedoFerreiraQB Hey Gabriel could you help review it?

[oentaryorj]

Will we have a release soon for the recent support on python 3.9, 3.10? @oentaryorj

We shall publish a new release once we have enough new features and/or bug fixes.

[EvgeniiaVeselova]

LGTM