Skip to content

Remove deleter attribute from pygetset #5984

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged

Conversation

ever0de
Copy link
Contributor

@ever0de ever0de commented Jul 15, 2025

Ref

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • None.
  • Refactor

    • Removed support for the "deleter" functionality in property accessors. Only getter and setter accessors are now supported for properties.
  • Documentation

    • Updated attribute options to reflect the removal of "deleter" support.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 15, 2025

Walkthrough

The changes remove all support for "deleter" functionality from the pygetset infrastructure in the codebase. This includes eliminating the deleter variant from enums, removing deleter handling from structs, parsing, validation, and code generation, and updating allowed attribute names accordingly.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
derive-impl/src/pyclass.rs Removed all code related to "deleter" in getset handling: enums, struct fields, parsing, validation, and code generation. Updated allowed attribute names and method signatures to exclude deleter support.

Poem

In the garden of code where getters grow,
And setters gently come and go,
The deleter hopped away today,
No more to nibble fields astray.
With simpler stems, our getsets bloom,
Less to prune, more space to zoom!
🥕✨

✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@ever0de ever0de marked this pull request as ready for review July 15, 2025 16:30
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
derive-impl/src/pyclass.rs (1)

1074-1082: Review the unwrap() call safety in validation

The validation logic correctly iterates over getter and setter pairs. However, line 1077 uses unwrap() on the setter without explicit safety documentation.

While this should be safe based on the invariant that map entries are only created when either getter or setter is set, consider adding a comment to document this assumption:

             if getter.is_none() {
                 errors.push(err_span!(
+                    // Safety: If getter is None, setter must be Some due to add_item invariant
                     setter.as_ref().unwrap(),
                     "GetSet '{}' is missing a getter",
                     name
                 ));
             };
📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a54873d and a2fbff4.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • derive-impl/src/pyclass.rs (5 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
**/*.rs

Instructions used from:

Sources:
📄 CodeRabbit Inference Engine

  • .github/copilot-instructions.md
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (4)
  • GitHub Check: Run snippets and cpython tests (windows-latest)
  • GitHub Check: Run snippets and cpython tests (ubuntu-latest)
  • GitHub Check: Run snippets and cpython tests (macos-latest)
  • GitHub Check: Run rust tests (windows-latest)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
derive-impl/src/pyclass.rs (4)

1035-1035: LGTM - Correctly removes deleter from map structure

The change from a 3-tuple to a 2-tuple properly removes the deleter identifier storage, maintaining only getter and setter functionality.


1092-1109: LGTM - Token generation correctly updated for getter/setter only

The ToTokens implementation has been properly updated to generate PyGetSet objects with only getter and optional setter functionality, removing all deleter-related code generation.


1234-1234: LGTM - Correctly removes "deleter" from allowed attribute names

The ALLOWED_NAMES constant has been properly updated to only include "name" and "setter", removing "deleter" support from the GetSetItemMeta parsing.


1248-1252: LGTM - Parsing logic correctly simplified

The getset_name method has been properly updated to only distinguish between getter and setter kinds, removing all deleter-related parsing logic. The boolean check for "setter" attribute is clean and straightforward.

Copy link
Member

@youknowone youknowone left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you!

@youknowone youknowone merged commit 177bfb7 into RustPython:main Jul 16, 2025
22 of 23 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants