New Research: Supply Chain Attack on Axios Pulls Malicious Dependency from npm.Details → →
Socket
Book a DemoSign in
Socket
Book a DemoSign in

dataclasses

Package Overview
Dependencies
Maintainers
1
Versions
8
Alerts
File Explorer

Advanced tools

License
Socket logo

Install Socket

Detect and block malicious and high-risk dependencies

Install

dataclasses - pypi Package Compare versions

Comparing version
0.7
 to
0.8
+11
-9
dataclasses.egg-info/PKG-INFO
Metadata-Version: 1.2
Name: dataclasses
Version: 0.7
Version: 0.8
Summary: A backport of the dataclasses module for Python 3.6

@@ -61,10 +61,10 @@ Home-page: https://github.com/ericvsmith/dataclasses

This backport assumes that dict objects retain their sort order. This
is true in the language spec for Python 3.7 and greater. Since this
is a backport to Python 3.6, it raises an interesting question: does
that guarantee apply to 3.6? For CPython 3.6 it does. As of the time
of this writing, it's also true for all other Python implementations
that claim to be 3.6 compatible, of which there are none. Any new
3.6 implementations are expected to have ordered dicts. See the
analysis at the end of this email:
This backport assumes that dict objects retain their insertion order.
This is true in the language spec for Python 3.7 and greater. Since
this is a backport to Python 3.6, it raises an interesting question:
does that guarantee apply to 3.6? For CPython 3.6 it does. As of the
time of this writing, it's also true for all other Python
implementations that claim to be 3.6 compatible, of which there are
none. Any new 3.6 implementations are expected to have ordered dicts.
See the analysis at the end of this email:

@@ -82,2 +82,4 @@ https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-December/151325.html

+=========+============+=====================================+
| 0.8 | 2020-11-13 | Fix ClassVar in .replace() |
+---------+------------+-------------------------------------+
| 0.7 | 2019-10-20 | Require python 3.6 only |

@@ -84,0 +86,0 @@ +---------+------------+-------------------------------------+

+8
-1
dataclasses.py

@@ -419,3 +419,3 @@ import re

# to actually do the assignment statement for InitVars.
if f._field_type == _FIELD_INITVAR:
if f._field_type is _FIELD_INITVAR:
return None

@@ -1162,2 +1162,6 @@

for f in getattr(obj, _FIELDS).values():
# Only consider normal fields or InitVars.
if f._field_type is _FIELD_CLASSVAR:
continue
if not f.init:

@@ -1172,2 +1176,5 @@ # Error if this field is specified in changes.

if f.name not in changes:
if f._field_type is _FIELD_INITVAR:
raise ValueError(f"InitVar {f.name!r} "
'must be specified with replace()')
changes[f.name] = getattr(obj, f.name)

@@ -1174,0 +1181,0 @@ 

+11
-9
PKG-INFO
Metadata-Version: 1.2
Name: dataclasses
Version: 0.7
Version: 0.8
Summary: A backport of the dataclasses module for Python 3.6

@@ -61,10 +61,10 @@ Home-page: https://github.com/ericvsmith/dataclasses

This backport assumes that dict objects retain their sort order. This
is true in the language spec for Python 3.7 and greater. Since this
is a backport to Python 3.6, it raises an interesting question: does
that guarantee apply to 3.6? For CPython 3.6 it does. As of the time
of this writing, it's also true for all other Python implementations
that claim to be 3.6 compatible, of which there are none. Any new
3.6 implementations are expected to have ordered dicts. See the
analysis at the end of this email:
This backport assumes that dict objects retain their insertion order.
This is true in the language spec for Python 3.7 and greater. Since
this is a backport to Python 3.6, it raises an interesting question:
does that guarantee apply to 3.6? For CPython 3.6 it does. As of the
time of this writing, it's also true for all other Python
implementations that claim to be 3.6 compatible, of which there are
none. Any new 3.6 implementations are expected to have ordered dicts.
See the analysis at the end of this email:

@@ -82,2 +82,4 @@ https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-December/151325.html

+=========+============+=====================================+
| 0.8 | 2020-11-13 | Fix ClassVar in .replace() |
+---------+------------+-------------------------------------+
| 0.7 | 2019-10-20 | Require python 3.6 only |

@@ -84,0 +86,0 @@ +---------+------------+-------------------------------------+

+10
-8
README.rst

@@ -53,10 +53,10 @@ .. image:: https://img.shields.io/pypi/v/dataclasses.svg

This backport assumes that dict objects retain their sort order. This
is true in the language spec for Python 3.7 and greater. Since this
is a backport to Python 3.6, it raises an interesting question: does
that guarantee apply to 3.6? For CPython 3.6 it does. As of the time
of this writing, it's also true for all other Python implementations
that claim to be 3.6 compatible, of which there are none. Any new
3.6 implementations are expected to have ordered dicts. See the
analysis at the end of this email:
This backport assumes that dict objects retain their insertion order.
This is true in the language spec for Python 3.7 and greater. Since
this is a backport to Python 3.6, it raises an interesting question:
does that guarantee apply to 3.6? For CPython 3.6 it does. As of the
time of this writing, it's also true for all other Python
implementations that claim to be 3.6 compatible, of which there are
none. Any new 3.6 implementations are expected to have ordered dicts.
See the analysis at the end of this email:

@@ -74,2 +74,4 @@ https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-December/151325.html

+=========+============+=====================================+
| 0.8 | 2020-11-13 | Fix ClassVar in .replace() |
+---------+------------+-------------------------------------+
| 0.7 | 2019-10-20 | Require python 3.6 only |

@@ -76,0 +78,0 @@ +---------+------------+-------------------------------------+

+1
-1
setup.py

@@ -8,3 +8,3 @@ from setuptools import setup

name="dataclasses",
version="0.7",
version="0.8",
description="A backport of the dataclasses module for Python 3.6",

@@ -11,0 +11,0 @@ long_description=README,

test/test_dataclasses.py

Sorry, the diff of this file is too big to display