You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Document the preferred style for API functions with three, four or five-way returns #1121
Most C API functions either succeed or fail. Those functions return NULL/not-NULL or 0/-1. No problem there.
However there are functions that can have three or more return kinds.
For example, found/not-found/error, yield/return/raise, or even less-than/equal/greater-than/unordered/error in the case of comparisons.
For those functions we want to return the kind as an int, setting any PyObject * results through an out pointer.
The devguide should document the preferred way to do this, to avoid endless debate for each new C API function.
Since _Py_DecodeLocaleEx() is a private function, it can do whatever it wants 🙂
Having said that, it is possible that an API function would want to distinguish between error types.
I don't think that is worth changing the rules for some hypothetical use case, though.
For functions returning failure or success, the return value is respectively -1 and 0.
For functions returning failure, lesser result (success), greater result (success), the return values are respectively -1, 0, and 1.
I'm +1 for those two guidelines.
Also, to avoid any potential confusion: when we're talking about returning, I interpret that as the C return statement; I do not interpret that as an "output parameter" (for example a pointer to an int). Example:
// This function _returns_ -1 in case of error, else 0.intfunc(void)
{
/* do stuff */if (error) {
raise_exception();
return-1;
}
return0;
}
For functions that return (the C return statement) two different kinds of values, yes.
But this issue is about functions that (C) return three or more different values, like PyDict_GetItem[Suffix].
I think we are all in agreement that in the case of failure, -1 should be returned.
Opinions differ on how to handle success variants.
For functions returning failure or success, the return value is respectively -1 and 0.
In PR #106005, adding PyDict_GetItemRef() function, @markshannon asks to return 1 if the key is present and 0 if the key is missing. Is it a bad practice? Is it better to return 0 in both cases (that was my first implementation)?
For functions returning failure or success, the return value is respectively -1 and 0.
In PR #106005, adding PyDict_GetItemRef() function, @markshannon asks to return 1 if the key is present and 0 if the key is missing. Is it a bad practice? Is it better to return 0 in both cases (that was my first implementation)?
Try reading the next line 😉
For functions returning failure, lesser result (success), greater result (success), the return values are respectively -1, 0, and 1.
For functions that return (the C return statement) two different kinds of values, yes.
[...]
I think we are all in agreement that in the case of failure, -1 should be returned.
Sure; but I prefer to document it so there's even less chance of friction :)
One other issue is whether the output parameter should be touched if there is no meaningful value.
Take PyDict_GetItemSuffixToBeDecided(PyDictObject *op, PyObject *key, PyObject **pvalue).
Should we touch *pvalue if returning -1 or 0.
In other words, in
Should value be undefined if err <= 0, or should it be set to NULL?
It is more efficient to not touch it, since the return value specifies that it has no meaning.
But, do we trust all C extension authors not to read the value, which may point to a real object if they are unlucky? Setting *pvalue = NULL is safer.
Should value be undefined if err <= 0, or should it be set to NULL?
In my PyDict_GetItemRef() PR, I chose to always initialized *pvalue, especially in the error case (return -1). IMO there is a minor performance overhead, but it closes a whole class of issue: undefined behavior if the function returns -1. Some C compilers try to evaluate all code paths and say that a &value argument "can be undefined" when the code is correct. A common workaround makes me sad: initialize the value in the calling site: PyObject *value = NULL; :-(
For the "return 0" case (missing key), I also prefer to set *pvalue to NULL for the same reason, but also because people upgrading their code from PyDict_GetItem() and PyDict_GetItemWithError() may want to check if value is NULL or not, rather than checking the return value:
PyObject *value; // OMG! undefined value
if (PyDict_GetItemRef(dict, key, &value) < 0) ... error ...
else if (value == NULL) ... missing key ...
else ... key is present ...
Here the function result is not used for the second code path: ... missing key ....
I'm not comfortable to document that *pvalue is intialized for the error case (return -1). But I wrote an unit test for that.
I think we are all in agreement that in the case of failure, -1 should be returned.
IMO, a negative value should be returned. Functions should return -1 unless they have a reason to use something else (like distinguish between error types), but callers should check with < 0.
Also, IMO we should say that a negative value should be returned iff an exception is raised. I.e., make it very clear what counts as “failure”.
IMO, a negative value should be returned. Functions should return -1 unless they have a reason to use something else (like distinguish between error types), but callers should check with < 0.
Also, IMO we should say that a negative value should be returned iff an exception is raised. I.e., make it very clear what counts as “failure”.
Adding something like this would indeed make the guidelines clearer. I'll create PR with an amendment shortly.
Activity
vstinner commentedon Jun 23, 2023
While it's different, here is an example of API using different negative values for result.
The private _Py_DecodeLocaleEx() function returns 0 on success, or a negative number on error:
markshannon commentedon Jun 23, 2023
Since
_Py_DecodeLocaleEx()is a private function, it can do whatever it wants 🙂Having said that, it is possible that an API function would want to distinguish between error types.
I don't think that is worth changing the rules for some hypothetical use case, though.
Are there any other examples?
erlend-aasland commentedon Jun 23, 2023
AFAICS, the proposed guideline is:
I'm +1 for those two guidelines.
Also, to avoid any potential confusion: when we're talking about returning, I interpret that as the C return statement; I do not interpret that as an "output parameter" (for example a pointer to an
int). Example:markshannon commentedon Jun 23, 2023
For functions that return (the C return statement) two different kinds of values, yes.
But this issue is about functions that (C) return three or more different values, like
PyDict_GetItem[Suffix].I think we are all in agreement that in the case of failure, -1 should be returned.
Opinions differ on how to handle success variants.
vstinner commentedon Jun 23, 2023
In PR #106005, adding PyDict_GetItemRef() function, @markshannon asks to return 1 if the key is present and 0 if the key is missing. Is it a bad practice? Is it better to return 0 in both cases (that was my first implementation)?
markshannon commentedon Jun 23, 2023
Try reading the next line 😉
erlend-aasland commentedon Jun 23, 2023
I made a PR: #1123
erlend-aasland commentedon Jun 23, 2023
Sure; but I prefer to document it so there's even less chance of friction :)
markshannon commentedon Jun 23, 2023
One other issue is whether the output parameter should be touched if there is no meaningful value.
Take
PyDict_GetItemSuffixToBeDecided(PyDictObject *op, PyObject *key, PyObject **pvalue).Should we touch
*pvalueif returning -1 or 0.In other words, in
Should
valuebe undefined iferr <= 0, or should it be set toNULL?It is more efficient to not touch it, since the return value specifies that it has no meaning.
But, do we trust all C extension authors not to read the value, which may point to a real object if they are unlucky? Setting
*pvalue = NULLis safer.erlend-aasland commentedon Jun 23, 2023
Yeah... let's establish guidelines for the return values first; then we can follow up with guidelines for output parameters.
vstinner commentedon Jun 23, 2023
In my PyDict_GetItemRef() PR, I chose to always initialized
*pvalue, especially in the error case (return -1). IMO there is a minor performance overhead, but it closes a whole class of issue: undefined behavior if the function returns -1. Some C compilers try to evaluate all code paths and say that a&valueargument "can be undefined" when the code is correct. A common workaround makes me sad: initialize the value in the calling site:PyObject *value = NULL;:-(For the "return 0" case (missing key), I also prefer to set
*pvalueto NULL for the same reason, but also because people upgrading their code from PyDict_GetItem() and PyDict_GetItemWithError() may want to check ifvalueis NULL or not, rather than checking the return value:Here the function result is not used for the second code path:
... missing key ....I'm not comfortable to document that
*pvalueis intialized for the error case (return -1). But I wrote an unit test for that.encukou commentedon Jun 26, 2023
IMO, a negative value should be returned. Functions should return -1 unless they have a reason to use something else (like distinguish between error types), but callers should check with
< 0.Also, IMO we should say that a negative value should be returned iff an exception is raised. I.e., make it very clear what counts as “failure”.
erlend-aasland commentedon Jun 26, 2023
Adding something like this would indeed make the guidelines clearer. I'll create PR with an amendment shortly.
willingc commentedon Oct 13, 2023
@erlend-aasland Should this issue be closed or is there remaining work?
erlend-aasland commentedon Oct 13, 2023
We will leave this to the C API Workgroup. If needed, they can create a new issue or reopen this.