While trying to figure out if a function is called with the @decorator
syntax, we realized that inspect
has a different behaviour when looking at a decorated class that inherits from a superclass.
The following behaviour was found with CPython 3.6.2 under Windows 10.
It was also reproduced in CPython 3.7.0 under Linux 64 bits.
import inspect
def decorate(f):
lines = inspect.stack()[1].code_context
print(f.__name__, lines)
return f
@decorate
class Foo:
pass
@decorate
class Bar(dict):
pass
Output
Foo ['@decorate\n']
Bar ['class Bar(dict):\n']
Why does inheritance change the behaviour of inspect
?
Further experiment shows that this is a quirk of Python's line number assignment. Particularly, if we use dis
to see the disassembly of code with and without a base class:
import dis
import sys
dis.dis(sys._getframe().f_code)
def dec(): pass
@dec
class Foo: pass
@dec
class Bar(Foo): pass
We see that for Foo
, the instructions involved have line number 8 (corresponding to the @dec
line):
8 58 LOAD_NAME 4 (dec)
61 LOAD_BUILD_CLASS
62 LOAD_CONST 4 (<code object Foo at 0x2b2a65422810, file "./prog.py", line 8>)
65 LOAD_CONST 5 ('Foo')
68 MAKE_FUNCTION 0
71 LOAD_CONST 5 ('Foo')
74 CALL_FUNCTION 2 (2 positional, 0 keyword pair)
77 CALL_FUNCTION 1 (1 positional, 0 keyword pair)
80 STORE_NAME 5 (Foo)
But for Bar
, the line number advances from 11 to 12 for the LOAD_NAME
that loads the base class:
11 83 LOAD_NAME 4 (dec)
86 LOAD_BUILD_CLASS
87 LOAD_CONST 6 (<code object Bar at 0x2b2a654a0f60, file "./prog.py", line 11>)
90 LOAD_CONST 7 ('Bar')
93 MAKE_FUNCTION 0
96 LOAD_CONST 7 ('Bar')
12 99 LOAD_NAME 5 (Foo)
102 CALL_FUNCTION 3 (3 positional, 0 keyword pair)
105 CALL_FUNCTION 1 (1 positional, 0 keyword pair)
108 STORE_NAME 6 (Bar)
With no base class, the parent frame's f_lineno
is on the @
line when the decorator runs. With a base class, the parent frame is on the load-the-base-class line.
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/52192877/why-does-inspect-return-different-line-for-class-inheriting-from-superclass