Upgrade to Python 3.10 #35915
Merged
Upgrade to Python 3.10 #35915
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Needed to remove the setuptools pin to resolve dependencies. Co-authored-by: Jonathan Haigh <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jonathan Haigh <[email protected]>
Iterables has been moved to collections.abc and was derecated from within collections a while ago. In Python 3.10 it was removed. Co-authored-by: Jonathan Haigh <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jonathan Haigh <[email protected]>
Python 3.10 no longer uses implicit conversion with loss from a float to an int Co-authored-by: Jonathan Haigh <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jonathan Haigh <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Martyn Gigg <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jonathan Haigh <[email protected]>
… lhs_info Co-authored-by: Jonathan Haigh <[email protected]>
Limited the scope of the GIL release so that manipulating python objects can be done within the function. Previously it worked, but the behaviour was changed for Python 3.10. See here: https://docs.python.org/3/c-api/dict.html#c.PyDict_GetItem Co-authored-by: Jonathan Haigh <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Martyn Gigg <[email protected]>
WorkbenchStartupTest was failing in Python 3.10. Something was prepending the Windows long path syntax to the MANTIDPATH env variable. You cannot mix back and forward slashes in long paths, so here we have addressed that. Co-authored-by: Jonathan Haigh <[email protected]>
It's not compatible with Python 3.10. We will replace it with quickBayes when that is ready.
thomashampson
force-pushed
the
35228_python_3_10_upgrade
branch
from
b8e6408 to
770876a
Compare
This function will do nothing in Python>=3.9 and was been called from Py_Initialize() since 3.7 https://docs.python.org/3/c-api/init.html#c.PyEval_InitThreads
thomashampson
added
ISIS Team: Core
thomashampson
commented
Aug 18, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changes were made to this file to fix the failing tests before we understood that there was a problem with the lhs_info() function. The fix in funcinspect.py would have solved the problem anyway. I don't think there's any harm in keeping these changes in.
robertapplin
approved these changes
Aug 23, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Description of work
Upgrade Python to 3.10.
Purpose of work
Last year conda-forge announced they were dropping support for Python 3.7 when 3.11 was released. If we expect similar for the release of Python 3.12, then they will drop support for Python 3.8 in October this year. Therefore we should move away from Python 3.8 for the upcoming release.
Summary of work
Mostly fixing deprecation warnings, but some obscure things had broken due to low-level Python changes, including:
lhs_info()stopped working correctly in some casesSee individual commits for more information. The work has been separated out by commit in a logical way.
To test:
Fixes #35228
Reviewer
Please comment on the points listed below (full description).
Your comments will be used as part of the gatekeeper process, so please comment clearly on what you have checked during your review. If changes are made to the PR during the review process then your final comment will be the most important for gatekeepers. In this comment you should make it clear why any earlier review is still valid, or confirm that all requested changes have been addressed.
Code Review
Functional Tests
Does everything look good? Mark the review as Approve. A member of
@mantidproject/gatekeeperswill take care of it.Gatekeeper
If you need to request changes to a PR then please add a comment and set the review status to "Request changes". This will stop the PR from showing up in the list for other gatekeepers.