Skip to content

struct.Struct.format is bytes, but should be str #65270

Closed

Description

@zbysz
mannequin
BPO 21071
Nosy @rhettinger, @vstinner, @benjaminp, @bitdancer, @vadmium, @serhiy-storchaka, @zhangyangyu
PRs
  • bpo-21071: struct.Struct.format type is now str #845
  • Files
  • format-bytes.patch
  • format-str.patch
  • Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.

    Show more details

    GitHub fields:

    assignee = None
    closed_at = <Date 2017-06-23.13:14:01.966>
    created_at = <Date 2014-03-26.17:48:53.473>
    labels = ['3.7', 'type-bug', 'library', 'docs']
    title = 'struct.Struct.format is bytes, but should be str'
    updated_at = <Date 2017-06-23.13:14:01.965>
    user = 'https://bugs.python.org/zbysz'

    bugs.python.org fields:

    activity = <Date 2017-06-23.13:14:01.965>
    actor = 'vstinner'
    assignee = 'docs@python'
    closed = True
    closed_date = <Date 2017-06-23.13:14:01.966>
    closer = 'vstinner'
    components = ['Documentation', 'Library (Lib)']
    creation = <Date 2014-03-26.17:48:53.473>
    creator = 'zbysz'
    dependencies = []
    files = ['37474', '37488']
    hgrepos = []
    issue_num = 21071
    keywords = ['patch']
    message_count = 24.0
    messages = ['214903', '214905', '214906', '214907', '216655', '232768', '232840', '232843', '232857', '232863', '232868', '232880', '232955', '290500', '290584', '290595', '290596', '290601', '292398', '292409', '292411', '292558', '296710', '296711']
    nosy_count = 10.0
    nosy_names = ['rhettinger', 'vstinner', 'benjamin.peterson', 'Arfrever', 'r.david.murray', 'zbysz', 'docs@python', 'martin.panter', 'serhiy.storchaka', 'xiang.zhang']
    pr_nums = ['845']
    priority = 'normal'
    resolution = 'fixed'
    stage = 'resolved'
    status = 'closed'
    superseder = None
    type = 'behavior'
    url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue21071'
    versions = ['Python 3.7']

    Activity

    1. zbysz commented on Mar 26, 2014

      zbyszmannequin
      MannequinAuthor

      In Python 2, Struct.format used to be a str. In Python 3 it is bytes, which is unexpected.

      Why do I expect .format to be a string:

      • This format is pretty much the same as a "{}-format" - plain text
      • according to documentation it is composed of things like characters from a closed set '<.=@hi...', a subset of ASCII,
      • it is always called "format string" in the documentation

      Why is this a problem:

      • If I use a str format in constructor, I expect to get a str format,
      • Comparisons are broken:
      >>> struct.Struct('x').format == 'x'
      False
      >>> struct.Struct('x').format[0] == 'x'
      False
      
      - doctests are broken
      >>> struct.Struct('x').format
      'x' # in Python 2
      b'x' # in Python 3
    2. added
      stdlibStandard Library Python modules in the Lib/ directory
      type-bugAn unexpected behavior, bug, or error
      on Mar 26, 2014
    3. benjaminp commented on Mar 26, 2014

      @benjaminp
      Contributor

      I agree that's rather unfortunate. It would be backwards incompatible to change, though.

    4. zbysz commented on Mar 26, 2014

      zbyszmannequin
      MannequinAuthor

      Maybe a flag param for the constructor?

    5. bitdancer commented on Mar 26, 2014

      @bitdancer
      Member

      I agree that the implementation does not match the documentation in this case. Especially the part about "the format string used to create this Struct object". I don't see what having a flag would buy you: it doesn't help you in writing 2/3 shared code. I think the best we can do here is a doc change.

    6. vadmium commented on Apr 17, 2014

      @vadmium
      Member

      This is closely related to bpo-16349. If format strings were explicitly allowed to be byte strings there would be less conflict, but documenting the data type of the “format” attribute is better than nothing.

    7. vadmium commented on Dec 16, 2014

      @vadmium
      Member

      It seems to me that the simplest fix is to document:

      1. Struct.format attribute is a byte string
      2. The input format strings for struct.pack(), Struct class, etc, are also allowed to be byte strings, for consistency (bpo-16349)

      Here is a patch that does that, and adds some simple test cases.

    8. vstinner commented on Dec 17, 2014

      @vstinner
      Member

      It would be backwards incompatible to change, though.

      I'm in favor of breaking the compatibility with Python 3.4 and return the format as an Unicode string.

    9. vadmium commented on Dec 18, 2014

      @vadmium
      Member

      I originally assumed it would be a text string from the existing documentation, so changing the behaviour to match also seems reasonable

    10. vadmium commented on Dec 18, 2014

      @vadmium
      Member

      Here is a patch that changes over to a str() type.

      Is it safe to assume PyUnicode_AsUTF8() is null-terminated (like PyBytes_AS_STRING() is)? My documentation doesn’t say.

    11. vstinner commented on Dec 18, 2014

      @vstinner
      Member

      Is it safe to assume PyUnicode_AsUTF8() is null-terminated?

      Yes, Python ensures that the string is null terminated.

      (like PyBytes_AS_STRING() is)

      Yes, PyBytes_AS_STRING() also ends with a null byte.

      By the way, Unicode strings internally ends with a null character.

    12. serhiy-storchaka commented on Dec 18, 2014

      @serhiy-storchaka
      Member

      I think breaking the compatibility should be discussed on Python-Dev. Similar issue (and even worse) is bpo-8934.

    13. 1 remaining item

    14. rhettinger commented on Dec 20, 2014

      @rhettinger
      Contributor

      I would like to see this and bpo-8934 discussed as a usability bug. As far as I can tell, the current state of affairs an unintended by-product of a rushed effort to split the standard library to bytes apis and unicode apis. I don't see any reason that we should have to live with this forever.

    15. vadmium commented on Mar 25, 2017

      @vadmium
      Member

      A backwards-compatible way forward would be to preserve (and document) the “format” attribute as a byte string, and add a new attribute which is definitely a text string. Not sure of a good name; perhaps “Struct.text_format” or “format_str” is a start.

    16. vstinner commented on Mar 27, 2017

      @vstinner
      Member

      I created #845 to change struct.Struct.format type to str (Unicode).

      struct.Struct() accepts bytes and str format strings, so it's not really a backward incompatible change.

      It's just a minor enhancement to help development:

      $ ./python
      Python 3.7.0a0 (heads/master-dirty:b8a7daf, Mar 27 2017, 13:02:20) 
      >>> print(struct.Struct('hi').format)
      hi

      Without the patch:

      haypo@selma$ python3
      Python 3.5.2 (default, Sep 14 2016, 11:28:32) 
      [GCC 6.2.1 20160901 (Red Hat 6.2.1-1)] on linux
      Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
      >>> import struct
      >>> print(struct.Struct('hi').format)
      b'hi'
      
      haypo@selma$ python3 -bb
      Python 3.5.2 (default, Sep 14 2016, 11:28:32) 
      >>> import struct
      >>> print(struct.Struct('hi').format)
      Traceback (most recent call last):
        ...
      BytesWarning: str() on a bytes instance
    17. serhiy-storchaka commented on Mar 27, 2017

      @serhiy-storchaka
      Member

      This should be discussed on Python-Dev first. I already raised this issue on Python-Dev, but don't remember what is the result.

    18. vadmium commented on Mar 27, 2017

      @vadmium
      Member

      Hi Victor, I’m not sure about changing the data type. As Python 3 grows older, there is potentially more code being written that you break by fixing a bug like this. It is incompatible if you used to write

      >>> print(struct.Struct('hi').format.decode())
      hi

      I have used this decode() trick in the past to build composite format strings; e.g.: <https://bugs.python.org/issue16349#msg174083\>. If you change the data type this code will raise AttributeError. At a minimum you should acknowledge it in the “porting” section of What’s New.

      Also, if you make this change, maybe update the module doc string. See the end of format-str.patch.

    19. vstinner commented on Mar 27, 2017

      @vstinner
      Member

      Ok, I opened a thread on python-dev:
      https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-March/147688.html

      Martin: "At a minimum you should acknowledge it in the “porting”
      section of What’s New."

      I wasn't sure if the change was worth it to be mentionned in What's
      New in Python 3.7. Ok, will do for the next round (I'm now waiting for
      more feedback on my python-dev thread and this issue.)

    20. zhangyangyu commented on Apr 27, 2017

      @zhangyangyu
      Member

      +1 for change bytes to str. But struct.Struct() accepts both bytes and str, maybe in future buffer objects. When it gets a bytes object, converting it to a str looks unnecessary to me, and as OP said, comparison (a theoretical use case) could still fail. Could we just leave what the user passes in? bytes(bytes-like) -> bytes, str -> str. This looks more natural to me.

    21. serhiy-storchaka commented on Apr 27, 2017

      @serhiy-storchaka
      Member

      After changing the type of Struct.format to str we perhaps should deprecate accepting bytes as format. Currently this can lead to emitting a BytesWarning.

      $ ./python -Wa -b
      >>> import struct
      >>> struct.pack('I', 12345)
      b'90\x00\x00'
      >>> struct.pack(b'I', 12345)
      __main__:1: BytesWarning: Comparison between bytes and string
      __main__:1: BytesWarning: Comparison between bytes and string
      b'90\x00\x00'
    22. zhangyangyu commented on Apr 27, 2017

      @zhangyangyu
      Member

      The warnings are possible to remove I think... but deprecate bytes arguments sounds good.

    23. vadmium commented on Apr 29, 2017

      @vadmium
      Member

      I don’t think the API should be expanded to accept arbitrary bytes-like objects as format strings. Struct formats are strings of ASCII-compatible characters, but not arbitrary chunks of memory.

      I think the main question is whether it is okay to break compatibility (Victor’s pull request, or my format-str.patch), or whether there has to be a backwards-compatible deprecation of the existing bytes attribute. FWIW I am okay with breaking compatibility, since the main documentation already implies it should be a text string.

    24. vstinner commented on Jun 23, 2017

      @vstinner
      Member

      New changeset f87b85f by Victor Stinner in branch 'master':
      bpo-21071: struct.Struct.format type is now str (#845)
      f87b85f

    25. vstinner commented on Jun 23, 2017

      @vstinner
      Member

      Ok, I changed struct.Struct.format type to str (Unicode string).

      If someone wants to modify the C code to use a PyUnicodeObject rather than a char*, feel free to propose a further change.

      Since the initial issue is fixed, I now close the issue.

      Thank you all for your feedback and reviews ;-)

    26. transferred this issue fromon Apr 10, 2022
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

    Metadata

    Metadata

    Assignees

    No one assigned

      Labels

      3.7 (EOL)end of lifedocsDocumentation in the Doc dirstdlibStandard Library Python modules in the Lib/ directorytype-bugAn unexpected behavior, bug, or error

      Projects

      No projects

        Milestone

        No milestone

        Relationships

        None yet

        Development

        No branches or pull requests

        Issue actions