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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
fix: Correctly handle signature-less functions for Py UDF calls #6368
fix: Correctly handle signature-less functions for Py UDF calls #6368
Changes from 1 commit
1c7c344
d167332
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This PR is marked as fixing #6349. #6349 mentions two problems. This test is casting the return type, so it is either a partial fix of the ticket or there should be another test to check type inference.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looking into this problem some more,
pybind11
actually does provide signature information in a way that I think we are not yet supporting. From the example in #6349, I added:This outputs a docstring that is prefixed with the method signature.
Here are more things that may be useful:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
jedi
does try to infer function arguments for sphinx, epydoc and basic numpydoc docstrings, but it doesn't expose any public API for that.Based on the above, I am not sure it is so bad that we just document the limitation and workaround when we can't get a signature via the standard
inspect
module.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We could easily make this "just work" by using the return type. Relying on documented workarounds is a poor substitute to the product functioning as expected.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you mean we do a very crude parsing (regex search) of doc and look for '-> type' to get the 'return type'?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The improvement requested makes sense but is not trivial to do. We want to get the bug fix in first and #6382 is filed as an enhancement ticket for more broad inference support by the UDF parser.