#9107 closed defect (fixed)
Nested class name mangling can be wrong in case of double nesting
Reported by:  Florent Hivert  Owned by:  Nicolas M. Thiéry 

Priority:  major  Milestone:  sage6.3 
Component:  categories  Keywords:  
Cc:  Simon King, Mike Zabrocki  Merged in:  
Authors:  Simon King, Nicolas M. Thiéry  Reviewers:  Volker Braun, Florent Hivert, Travis Scrimshaw 
Report Upstream:  N/A  Work issues:  
Branch:  8b14e05 (Commits, GitHub, GitLab)  Commit:  
Dependencies:  #12808  Stopgaps: 
Description (last modified by )
In the following class tree:
class Bla(UniqueRepresentation): class Bla1(UniqueRepresentation): class Bla11: Pass class Bla2: class Bla21: Pass
The names are set to
sage: Bla.Bla1.__name__ 'Bla.Bla1' sage: Bla.Bla2.__name__ 'Bla.Bla2' sage: Bla.Bla2.Bla21.__name__ 'Bla.Bla2.Bla21'
But
sage: Bla.Bla1.Bla11.__name__ 'Bla1.Bla11'
whereas one would expect 'Bla.Bla1.Bla11'
This breaks a lot of doc in categories and in particular in functorial constructions.
Apply
Attachments (5)
Change History (92)
comment:1 Changed 11 years ago by
Cc:  Simon King added 

comment:2 Changed 11 years ago by
Dependencies:  → #12808 

comment:3 Changed 11 years ago by
Authors:  → Simon King 

Status:  new → needs_review 
I think the attached patch solves the problem. I get:
sage: class Bla(UniqueRepresentation): ....: class Bla1(UniqueRepresentation): ....: class Bla11: ....: pass ....: class Bla2: ....: class Bla21: ....: pass ....: sage: Bla.Bla1.Bla11 <class __main__.Bla.Bla1.Bla11 at 0x46e7808>
The change is in modify_for_nested_pickle
, which is called recursively. The idea is that the function should have an extra argument first_run
, that is True by default. If the extra argument is False, then it is assumed that it is not applied for the first time.
Here: Since Bla.Bla1 is an instance of NestedClassMetaclass
, modify_for_nested_pickle
is called on Bla.Bla1.Bla11
, resulting in Bla.Bla1.Bla11.__name__=='Bla1.Bla11'
. However, since Bla is an instance of NestedClassMetaclass
as well, the function is applied to Bla.Bla1
and thus recursively to Bla.Bla1.Bla11
another time.
Now, without my patch, in the second run, modify_for_nested_pickle
would be confused by the fact that Bla.Bla1.__dict__
lists Bla.Bla1.Bla11
under the name Bla11
, but Bla11.__name__=='Bla1.Bla11'
. With my patch, modify_for_nested_pickle
expects exactly that naming scheme, and is thus changing Bla.Bla1.Bla11.__name__
into "Bla.Bla1.Bla11"
.
Much BlaBla, but I think it works...
Potential problems
sage: module = sys.modules['__main__'] sage: getattr(module, 'Bla1.Bla11') <class __main__.Bla.Bla1.Bla11 at 0x46e7808> sage: getattr(module, 'Bla.Bla1.Bla11') <class __main__.Bla.Bla1.Bla11 at 0x46e7808>
Hence, Bla.Bla1.Bla11 is listed in the module under two different names. If you think it is bad, then one could probably modify the function when first_run is false, such that the name given in the first run is erased from the module.
Moreover, the reviewer will likely find a speed regression, when excessively creating nested unique representations. But that's hardly realistic...
comment:4 Changed 11 years ago by
Another problem: Source inspection does not work yet in the following example.
sage: cython_code = [ ... "from sage.structure.unique_representation import UniqueRepresentation", ... "class A1(UniqueRepresentation):", ... " class B1(UniqueRepresentation):", ... " class C1: pass", ... " class B2:", ... " class C2: pass"] sage: import os sage: cython(os.linesep.join(cython_code)) sage: A1.B1.C1?? Error getting source: class A1.B1.C1 has no attribute '__class__' Type: classobj String Form: _mnt_local_king__sage_temp_mpc622_6475_tmp_0_spyx_0.A1.B1.C1 Namespace: Interactive Loaded File: /mnt/local/king/.sage/temp/mpc622/6475/spyx/_mnt_local_king__sage_temp_mpc622_6475_tmp_0_spyx/_mnt_local_king__sage_temp_mpc622_6475_tmp_0_spyx_0.so Source File: /mnt/local/king/.sage/temp/mpc622/6475/spyx/_mnt_local_king__sage_temp_mpc622_6475_tmp_0_spyx/_mnt_local_king__sage_temp_mpc622_6475_tmp_0_spyx_0.so
Even #11768 does not solve the problem.
Shall that be dealt with on a different ticket? Or in one go?
Probably on a different ticket, since I just find that even source inspection for A1 (which has a usual name) does not work...
comment:5 Changed 11 years ago by
For the record: If #11791 is applied after this ticket, source inspection in the example above works (and is doctested).
comment:6 Changed 10 years ago by
Is there a reviewer to fix name mangling of nested classes (needed in the category framework)?
comment:7 Changed 10 years ago by
This patch also fixes an issue that came up in #8899 regarding documentation of nested classes not appearing in the reference manual.
See here for a description of the issue, see the thread on sagecombinatdevel.
See here for the confirmation that this works: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8899#comment:31
comment:8 Changed 10 years ago by
Reviewers:  → Volker Braun 

Status:  needs_review → positive_review 
LGTM!
comment:9 Changed 10 years ago by
This causes trouble when building the documentation from scratch (i.e. after deleting 'devel/sage/doc/output`):
/usr/local/src/sage5.5.rc1/local/lib/python2.7/sitepackages/sage/categories/algebras_with_basis.py:docstring of sage.categories.algebras_with_basis.AlgebrasWithBasis.CartesianProducts.ParentMethods.one_from_cartesian_product_of_one_basis:3: WARNING: more than one target found for crossreference u'one_basis': sage.combinat.sf.new_kschur.KBoundedSubspaceBases.ParentMethods.one_basis, sage.categories.algebras_with_basis.AlgebrasWithBasis.ParentMethods.one_basis, sage.combinat.ncsf_qsym.generic_basis_code.BasesOfQSymOrNCSF.ParentMethods.one_basis, sage.algebras.steenrod.steenrod_algebra.SteenrodAlgebra_generic.one_basis, sage.categories.examples.with_realizations.SubsetAlgebra.Fundamental.one_basis, sage.combinat.root_system.weyl_characters.WeightRing.one_basis, sage.categories.monoids.Monoids.Algebras.ParentMethods.one_basis, sage.categories.examples.hopf_algebras_with_basis.MyGroupAlgebra.one_basis, sage.categories.algebras_with_basis.AlgebrasWithBasis.TensorProducts.ParentMethods.one_basis, sage.algebras.affine_nil_temperley_lieb.AffineNilTemperleyLiebTypeA.one_basis, sage.categories.examples.algebras_with_basis.FreeAlgebra.one_basis, sage.combinat.symmetric_group_algebra.SymmetricGroupAlgebra_n.one_basis, sage.algebras.iwahori_hecke_algebra.IwahoriHeckeAlgebraT.one_basis, sage.algebras.group_algebra_new.GroupAlgebra.one_basis, sage.combinat.sf.sfa.SymmetricFunctionsBases.ParentMethods.one_basis, sage.combinat.root_system.weyl_characters.WeylCharacterRing.one_basis, sage.combinat.combinatorial_algebra.CombinatorialAlgebra.one_basis
comment:10 Changed 10 years ago by
Status:  positive_review → needs_work 

comment:12 Changed 10 years ago by
Aha, now I see that the very long single line contains warnings about cross references that were not found. I'll try to identify them.
comment:13 Changed 10 years ago by
Aha, here is an example:
The docstring of sage.categories.algebras_with_basis.AlgebrasWithBasis.CartesianProducts.ParentMethods.one_from_cartesian_product_of_one_basis
is as follows:
@cached_method # todo: reinstate once #5843 is fixed def one_from_cartesian_product_of_one_basis(self): """ Returns the one of this cartesian product of algebras, as per ``Monoids.ParentMethods.one`` It is constructed as the cartesian product of the ones of the summands, using their :meth:`.one_basis` methods. This implementation does not require multiplication by scalars nor calling cartesian_product. This might help keeping things as lazy as possible upon initialization. ...
Could this simply be a misspelling? Note that it is written
:meth:`.one_basis`
but should certainly be
:meth:`one_basis`
If that's the case for the other warnings as well, then my patch would just uncover mistakes that happened earlier.
comment:14 followup: 15 Changed 10 years ago by
The same issue arose in #13851 (see comment 10). I'm not sure why those dots are there, and I personally think they should be removed, but someone intentionally put them there.
comment:15 Changed 10 years ago by
Replying to jhpalmieri:
The same issue arose in #13851 (see comment 10). I'm not sure why those dots are there, and I personally think they should be removed, but someone intentionally put them there.
I think the dot is simply wrong  or is it ignored by Sphinx?
Actually here it is even worse. The text is documentation of a functorial construction, but refers to a parent method  that can't possibly work without an explicit reference to the method which must include the class which the method belongs to.
Changed 10 years ago by
Attachment:  trac_9107_fix_cross_reference.patch added 

Fix a cross reference in some functorial construction
comment:16 Changed 10 years ago by
Status:  needs_work → needs_review 

Does the second patch fix the problem? I am now explicitly referring to the one_basis
method of AlgebrasWithBasis.ParentMethods
.
comment:17 Changed 10 years ago by
Reviewers:  Volker Braun → Volker Braun, Florent Hivert 

Status:  needs_review → positive_review 
Hi Simon,
I again hit this one compiling the doc. Your patches look all good to me, including the one problem.
Thanks,
Florent
comment:18 Changed 10 years ago by
Status:  positive_review → needs_work 

Applying this patch causes the PDF docbuilder to hang after it's done building all documents. All documents are built but there are still 6 (I'm building with MAKE="make j6"
) child processes which are stuck in the multiprocessing.Pool
code. Interrupting those child processes simply causes new child processes to start which are then stuck again. It might be a bug in multiprocessing.Pool
which is somehow triggered, I have no idea...
comment:21 Changed 10 years ago by
Jeroen, does the problem persist with the new doc builder? I have just applied the two patches, and succeeded with export MAKE="make j2"
followed by make
.
However, there is continuation by ...
that needs fixing.
Changed 10 years ago by
Attachment:  trac9107_nesting_nested_classes.patch added 

comment:22 followup: 23 Changed 10 years ago by
Description:  modified (diff) 

Status:  needs_work → needs_review 
Building the docs works for me, and the ...
should be fixed now. Hence: Needs review!
Apply trac9107_nesting_nested_classes.patch trac_9107_fix_cross_reference.patch
comment:23 Changed 10 years ago by
comment:24 Changed 10 years ago by
There is a problem with latex and the fact that the docbuilder hangs is a bug in the new docbuilder: #14626
! LaTeX Error: Too deeply nested. See the LaTeX manual or LaTeX Companion for explanation. Type H <return> for immediate help. ... l.27819 \begin{Verbatim}[commandchars=\\\{\}] ? Implicit mode ON; LaTeX internals redefined (/usr/share/texmftexlive/tex/latex/ltxmisc/url.sty (/usr/share/texmftexlive/tex/latex/base/t1enc.def) ! Emergency stop. ... l.27819 \begin{Verbatim}[commandchars=\\\{\}] ! ==> Fatal error occurred, no output PDF file produced! Transcript written on categories.log. )make[1]: *** [categories.pdf] Error 1
comment:25 Changed 10 years ago by
Status:  needs_review → needs_work 

comment:26 followup: 27 Changed 10 years ago by
Yes, I did not consider the pdf docs.
If I understand correctly, we have two problems. The first problem is that with this patch, LaTeX
is produced that can not be processed because it is two deeply nested. The second problem is independent, namely if latex fails, then the docbuilder hangs.
Do you have any clue what object is being processed when things hang?
comment:27 Changed 10 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
The second problem is independent, namely if latex fails, then the docbuilder hangs.
Which is #14626 and indeed has nothing to do with this ticket.
Do you have any clue what object is being processed when things hang?
Not yet, I will reproduce the .tex
file and then it should be clear.
comment:28 Changed 10 years ago by
Offending .tex
file: http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/jdemeyer/badlatex/categories.tex
The relevant lines are
\begin{fulllineitems} \phantomsection\label{sage/categories/sets_cat:sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods}\pysigline{\strong{class }\bfcode{ParentMethods}}~\index{Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.Realizations (class in sage.categories.sets\_cat)} \begin{fulllineitems} \phantomsection\label{sage/categories/sets_cat:sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.Realizations}\pysiglinewithargsret{\strong{class }\bfcode{Realizations}}{\emph{parent\_with\_realization}}{} Bases: {\hyperref[sage/categories/realizations:sage.categories.realizations.Category_realization_of_parent]{\code{sage.categories.realizations.Category\_realization\_of\_parent}}} TESTS: \begin{Verbatim}[commandchars=\\\{\}] \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{k+kn}{from} \PYG{n+nn}{sage.categories.realizations} \PYG{k+kn}{import} \PYG{n}{Category\PYGZus{}realization\PYGZus{}of\PYGZus{}parent} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{A} \PYG{o}{=} \PYG{n}{Sets}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{WithRealizations}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{example}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{p}{;} \PYG{n}{A} \PYG{g+go}{The subset algebra of \PYGZob{}1, 2, 3\PYGZcb{} over Rational Field} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{C} \PYG{o}{=} \PYG{n}{A}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{Realizations}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{p}{;} \PYG{n}{C} \PYG{g+go}{Category of realizations of The subset algebra of \PYGZob{}1, 2, 3\PYGZcb{} over Rational Field} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n+nb}{isinstance}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{n}{C}\PYG{p}{,} \PYG{n}{Category\PYGZus{}realization\PYGZus{}of\PYGZus{}parent}\PYG{p}{)} \PYG{g+go}{True} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{C}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{parent\PYGZus{}with\PYGZus{}realization} \PYG{g+go}{The subset algebra of \PYGZob{}1, 2, 3\PYGZcb{} over Rational Field} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{TestSuite}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{n}{C}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{run}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)} \end{Verbatim} \index{super\_categories() (sage.categories.sets\_cat.Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.Realizations method)} \begin{fulllineitems} \phantomsection\label{sage/categories/sets_cat:sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.Realizations.super_categories}\pysiglinewithargsret{\bfcode{super\_categories}}{}{} EXAMPLES: \begin{Verbatim}[commandchars=\\\{\}] %% PROBLEM IS THIS LINE %% \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{A} \PYG{o}{=} \PYG{n}{Sets}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{WithRealizations}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{example}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{p}{;} \PYG{n}{A} \PYG{g+go}{The subset algebra of \PYGZob{}1, 2, 3\PYGZcb{} over Rational Field} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{A}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{Realizations}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{super\PYGZus{}categories}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)} \PYG{g+go}{[Category of realizations of sets]} \end{Verbatim} \end{fulllineitems} \end{fulllineitems} \index{facade\_for() (sage.categories.sets\_cat.Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods method)}
comment:29 followup: 30 Changed 10 years ago by
before this patch (good):
\phantomsection\label{sage/categories/sets_cat:sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods}\pysigline{\bfcode{ParentMethods}} alias of \code{WithRealizations.ParentMethods}
after this patch (bad):
\phantomsection\label{sage/categories/sets_cat:sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.Realizations}\pysiglinewithargsret{\strong{class }\bfcode{Realizations}}{\emph{parent\_with\_realization}}{} Bases: {\hyperref[sage/categories/realizations:sage.categories.realizations.Category_realization_of_parent]{\code{sage.categories.realizations.Category\_realization\_of\_parent}}}
comment:30 followup: 33 Changed 10 years ago by
Replying to jdemeyer:
before this patch (good):
\phantomsection\label{sage/categories/sets_cat:sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods}\pysigline{\bfcode{ParentMethods}} alias of \code{WithRealizations.ParentMethods}after this patch (bad):
\phantomsection\label{sage/categories/sets_cat:sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.Realizations}\pysiglinewithargsret{\strong{class }\bfcode{Realizations}}{\emph{parent\_with\_realization}}{} Bases: {\hyperref[sage/categories/realizations:sage.categories.realizations.Category_realization_of_parent]{\code{sage.categories.realizations.Category\_realization\_of\_parent}}}
Three questions:
 Why is it bad? I don't see why latex should have a problem with it.
 Isn't the "good" output without my patch just plain wrong? After all, we do have
sage: sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.Realizations.__bases__ (sage.categories.realizations.Category_realization_of_parent,)
and alsosage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.Realizations
is certainly not simply an alias ofWithRealizations.ParentMethods
.  Can you also point me to the code that created the latex output?
comment:31 Changed 10 years ago by
When I build the pdf docs, it works. On what machine do you see the failure? If it's on sage.math, it might have to do with the fact that the LaTeX installation is quite old...
Edit: maybe I'm seeing the failure now. Never mind.
comment:32 Changed 10 years ago by
OK, I see it, too.
../../sage docbuild reference pdf ... Output written on tensor.pdf (24 pages, 144532 bytes). Transcript written on tensor.log. Build finished. The built documents can be found in /home/simon/SAGE/prerelease/sage5.9.rc0/devel/sage/doc/output/pdf/en/reference/tensor
and then it hangs.
Nevertheless, I have no clue what is happening here. See my three questions in comment:30.
comment:33 followup: 34 Changed 10 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
 Why is it bad?
I just used "bad" because latex
doesn't compile it correctly.
 Can you also point me to the code that created the latex output?
I guess that's Sphinx, but I don't know much about it.
comment:34 Changed 10 years ago by
comment:35 followup: 36 Changed 10 years ago by
I think that the first line in the LaTeX error message is correct:
! LaTeX Error: Too deeply nested.
I think that there are too many levels of nesting of lists (from the fulllineitems
environment). If I comment out the Verbatim
environment that it's complaining about, I don't get an error message any more.
comment:36 Changed 10 years ago by
Replying to jhpalmieri:
I think that the first line in the LaTeX error message is correct:
! LaTeX Error: Too deeply nested.I think that there are too many levels of nesting of lists (from the
fulllineitems
environment). If I comment out theVerbatim
environment that it's complaining about, I don't get an error message any more.
Please, where is the nesting? I suppose by "comment out the Verbatim
environment that it's complaining about", you mean one of two Verbatim
environments that were cited in comment:28.
The first is
\begin{Verbatim}[commandchars=\\\{\}] \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{k+kn}{from} \PYG{n+nn}{sage.categories.realizations} \PYG{k+kn}{import} \PYG{n}{Category\PYGZus{}realization\PYGZus{}of\PYGZus{}parent} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{A} \PYG{o}{=} \PYG{n}{Sets}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{WithRealizations}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{example}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{p}{;} \PYG{n}{A} \PYG{g+go}{The subset algebra of \PYGZob{}1, 2, 3\PYGZcb{} over Rational Field} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{C} \PYG{o}{=} \PYG{n}{A}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{Realizations}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{p}{;} \PYG{n}{C} \PYG{g+go}{Category of realizations of The subset algebra of \PYGZob{}1, 2, 3\PYGZcb{} over Rational Field} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n+nb}{isinstance}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{n}{C}\PYG{p}{,} \PYG{n}{Category\PYGZus{}realization\PYGZus{}of\PYGZus{}parent}\PYG{p}{)} \PYG{g+go}{True} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{C}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{parent\PYGZus{}with\PYGZus{}realization} \PYG{g+go}{The subset algebra of \PYGZob{}1, 2, 3\PYGZcb{} over Rational Field} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{TestSuite}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{n}{C}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{run}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)} \end{Verbatim}
the second is
\begin{Verbatim}[commandchars=\\\{\}] %% PROBLEM IS THIS LINE %% \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{A} \PYG{o}{=} \PYG{n}{Sets}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{WithRealizations}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{example}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{p}{;} \PYG{n}{A} \PYG{g+go}{The subset algebra of \PYGZob{}1, 2, 3\PYGZcb{} over Rational Field} \PYG{g+gp}{sage: }\PYG{n}{A}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{Realizations}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)}\PYG{o}{.}\PYG{n}{super\PYGZus{}categories}\PYG{p}{(}\PYG{p}{)} \PYG{g+go}{[Category of realizations of sets]} \end{Verbatim}
I suppose %% PROBLEM IS THIS LINE %%
in the second environment was Jeroen's addition.
So, what is "too deeply nested"? I can't believe that such a short piece of text has even enough characters to nest too deeply for latex!
comment:37 Changed 10 years ago by
If I take the file categories.tex in SAGE_ROOT/devel/sage/doc/output/latex/en/reference/categories/
and truncate it just before the line starting \index{facade\_for() ...
, then I need to add in a few lines of the form
\end{fulllineitems}
to get it to compile (after I comment out the last Verbatim block before the line \index{facade\_for() ...
). So there are several fulllineitems
environments nested within each other. Maybe too many, and maybe that's the problem. That's my current guess.
comment:38 Changed 9 years ago by
Milestone:  sage5.11 → sage5.12 

comment:39 followup: 40 Changed 9 years ago by
Hey Nicolas and Simon,
The problem comes from the fact that there is a 4 level deep class nesting with a method (which is 5 levels deep) in the Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.Realizations.super_categories
. I've tried moving this subclass into a separate class, and this solves the pdf build issue but introduces some doctesting errors. I don't think there is a to extend the nesting level since that is a latex thing, nor do I think we should try since 4 nested classes is a lot IMO. I'm guessing beforehand because of the improper naming, latex did the environments differently...?
Anyways the fix for the pdf build is to remove a level (or two) of class nesting.
Best,
Travis
Edit: Here are the errors I get when I move Sets.WithRealizations
out as a separate class and then assign it into Sets
:
sage t ../categories/sets_cat.py ********************************************************************** File "../categories/sets_cat.py", line 1408, in sage.categories.sets_cat.ParentMethodsForWithRealizations.realizations Failed example: A.realizations() Expected: [The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the Fundamental basis, The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the In basis, The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the Out basis] Got: [The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the Fundamental basis, The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the In basis, The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the Out basis, The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the realization Blah] ********************************************************************** File "../categories/sets_cat.py", line 1428, in sage.categories.sets_cat.ParentMethodsForWithRealizations.facade_for Failed example: A.facade_for() Expected: [The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the Fundamental basis, The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the In basis, The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the Out basis] Got: [The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the Fundamental basis, The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the In basis, The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the Out basis, The subset algebra of {1, 2, 3} over Rational Field in the realization Blah] ********************************************************************** 2 items had failures: 1 of 8 in sage.categories.sets_cat.ParentMethodsForWithRealizations.facade_for 1 of 3 in sage.categories.sets_cat.ParentMethodsForWithRealizations.realizations [241 tests, 2 failures, 0.76 s]  sage t ../categories/sets_cat.py # 2 doctests failed 
Any ideas why moving the class out of the nesting doesn't work?
comment:40 followup: 41 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to tscrim:
I don't think there is a to extend the nesting level since that is a latex thing,
Shame on LaTeX!
Anyways the fix for the pdf build is to remove a level (or two) of class nesting.
What exactly are we talking about? Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.Realizations
?
Interestingly, there is the comment
# Do we really want this feature?
So, can we do without this feature? Nicolas?
comment:41 Changed 9 years ago by
comment:42 Changed 9 years ago by
Thanks much Travis for investigating!
I agree that there should be a recommendation for not nesting classes too deep, for the sake of readability. But having a hard arbitrary limit  especially that small  is annoying. Shame on LaTeX. Of course, one can always spin off a subtree of nested classes into a separate tree, but there are cases where one has a deep tree with very few lines and no natural splitting point. For example, #10963 introduces
DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.AdditiveAssociative.AdditiveCommutative.AdditiveUnital.AdditiveInverse
Hmm. Altogether, I would call this a LaTeX arbitrary hard limitation. Luckily there seems to be an easy solution to increase this limitation to something large enough to cover our current use cases, namely to use the package enumitem [1]. By itself, it brings the nesting level to 6, and we could even increase it further (10 should be really safe) using \setlistdepth{9}.
I have attached the little latex file I used for testing.
What do you think? Shall we add enumitems to the list of latex packages loaded by Sphinx? Is this standard enough, or shall we add enumitem.sty to the Sage distribution?
Cheers,
Nicolas
[1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1935952/maximumnestingleveloflistsinlatex
Changed 9 years ago by
Attachment:  testdeepitemizenesting.tex added 

comment:43 followup: 44 Changed 9 years ago by
enumitem.sty
looks pretty standard, so I'd say it's fine to use it.
comment:44 followup: 45 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to jdemeyer:
enumitem.sty
looks pretty standard, so I'd say it's fine to use it.
... which means there should be a separate ticket for adding it?
comment:45 followup: 46 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
... which means there should be a separate ticket for adding it?
Adding an \usepackage{}
somewhere (don't ask me where) should be trivial enough that it can be done on this ticket.
comment:46 Changed 9 years ago by
comment:47 followup: 48 Changed 9 years ago by
Me; I just did this with Ben on #14787. You need to add it to doc/common/conf.py
, and we also added it to misc/latex.py
, which might be some overkill, but it doesn't really hurt to be extra safe here.
comment:48 followup: 49 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to tscrim:
Me; I just did this with Ben on #14787. You need to add it to
doc/common/conf.py
, and we also added it tomisc/latex.py
, which might be some overkill, but it doesn't really hurt to be extra safe here.
Are you saying that the problem is fixed by #14787? Then I suggest to add it as dependency.
comment:49 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
Replying to tscrim:
Me; I just did this with Ben on #14787. You need to add it to
doc/common/conf.py
, and we also added it tomisc/latex.py
, which might be some overkill, but it doesn't really hurt to be extra safe here.Are you saying that the problem is fixed by #14787? Then I suggest to add it as dependency.
Sorry, that was phrased badly. Ben and I added a latex package to the pdf builder in #14787, but it was not enumitem.sty
.
comment:50 Changed 9 years ago by
Cc:  Mike Zabrocki added 

comment:51 followup: 52 Changed 9 years ago by
For the record: someone else got a similar issue when using sphinx [1], and suggested the same fix. Alas this fix does not seem to be enough. I am still getting a "Too deeply nested" with the attached file categories.tex (obtained by reducing that produced by sphinx). I am working on reducing it further.
[1] http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/ipythonuser/2012May/010144.html
Changed 9 years ago by
Attachment:  categories.tex added 

comment:52 followup: 53 Changed 9 years ago by
Hi Nicolas,
Replying to nthiery:
For the record: someone else got a similar issue when using sphinx [1], and suggested the same fix. Alas this fix does not seem to be enough.
What exactly did you do? Change sphinx.sty, as in the source you are giving? Or change doc/common/conf.py and misc/latex.py, as advised by Travis in comment:47?
Could it be that the following comment from the page you are citing applies?
However this requires version 3.0 of enumitem, which doesn't yet ship with many linux latex distributions.
comment:53 followup: 54 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
Replying to nthiery:
For the record: someone else got a similar issue when using sphinx [1], and suggested the same fix. Alas this fix does not seem to be enough.
What exactly did you do? Change sphinx.sty, as in the source you are giving? Or change doc/common/conf.py and misc/latex.py, as advised by Travis in comment:47?
I changed conf.py which properly added it to the generated categories.tex file (see the top of that file).
Could it be that the following comment from the page you are citing applies?
However this requires version 3.0 of enumitem, which doesn't yet ship with many linux latex distributions.
I have 3.5.2 ...
comment:54 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to nthiery:
Replying to SimonKing:
What exactly did you do? Change sphinx.sty, as in the source you are giving? Or change doc/common/conf.py and misc/latex.py, as advised by Travis in comment:47?
I changed conf.py which properly added it to the generated categories.tex file (see the top of that file).
Hm. Then, we are back to the question: What the heck is going wrong? Could we
perhaps ask on some LaTeX
forum about the problem? I mean, if we have a tex
file that does not compile, even though nesting should not be the problem any
more, then I think LaTeX
people should be made aware.
comment:55 followup: 56 Changed 9 years ago by
How can one test categories.tex? I can not run pdflatex on it, because it can't find sphinxmanual.cls
. Where do I get this file (and probably other files) from?
comment:56 followup: 57 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
How can one test categories.tex? I can not run pdflatex on it, because it can't find
sphinxmanual.cls
. Where do I get this file (and probably other files) from?
When I do declare x TEXINPUTS=.:$SAGE_ROOT/local/lib/python2.7/sitepackages/Sphinx1.1.2py2.7.egg/sphinx/texinputs/
then it does find sphinxmanual.cls, but the next attempt to call pdflatex on categories.tex fails as well. This time, it can't find report.cls
.
So, please tell me how one is supposed to run pdflatex on this file, so that I can reproduce the problem.
comment:57 followup: 58 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
Replying to SimonKing:
How can one test categories.tex? I can not run pdflatex on it, because it can't find
sphinxmanual.cls
. Where do I get this file (and probably other files) from?
When I do
declare x TEXINPUTS=.:$SAGE_ROOT/local/lib/python2.7/sitepackages/Sphinx1.1.2py2.7.egg/sphinx/texinputs/
then it does find sphinxmanual.cls, but the next attempt to call pdflatex on categories.tex fails as well. This time, it can't findreport.cls
.
You are missing a : at the end of TEXINPUT to let latex use its own library (report.cls is a standard class).
Or you can just be lazy and put the categories.tex file in the directory
<SAGE>/devel/sage/doc/output/latex/en/reference/categories
and run pdflatex from there.
comment:58 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to nthiery:
Replying to SimonKing:
When I do
declare x TEXINPUTS=.:$SAGE_ROOT/local/lib/python2.7/sitepackages/Sphinx1.1.2py2.7.egg/sphinx/texinputs/
then it does find sphinxmanual.cls, but the next attempt to call pdflatex on categories.tex fails as well. This time, it can't findreport.cls
.You are missing a : at the end of TEXINPUT to let latex use its own library (report.cls is a standard class).
Nope. After
declare x TEXINPUTS=.:~/SAGE/prerelease/sage5.11.beta3/local/lib/python2.7/sitepackages/Sphinx1.1.2py2.7.egg/sphinx/texinputs/:
pdflatex categories.tex
results in
! Undefined control sequence. <recently read> \setlistdepth l.19 \setlistdepth {9} ? ! Emergency stop. <recently read> \setlistdepth l.19 \setlistdepth {9} ! ==> Fatal error occurred, no output PDF file produced!
Or you can just be lazy and put the categories.tex file in the directory
<SAGE>/devel/sage/doc/output/latex/en/reference/categoriesand run pdflatex from there.
Nope, because this folder doesn't exist. Do I need to attempt building the pdf documentation first?
comment:59 Changed 9 years ago by
PS: Changing
\RequirePackage{enumitem}
into
\usepackage{enumitem}
did not help.
comment:60 Changed 9 years ago by
Aha. The log shows:
enumitem 2009/05/18 v2.2 Customized lists
and I guess that's too old.
comment:61 followup: 63 Changed 9 years ago by
OK, after getting a more recent version of the enumitem package, I first get a "too deeply nested" error on categories.tex. However, after doing
\setlistdepth{10}
(and not just depth 9), it compiles fine.
So, in other words, the problem can be solved. But I really wonder about the requirement that the user has to have a latex installation with a very recent enumitem. Can this be really required? Or would we be allowed to ship enumitem.sty with Sage?
Changed 9 years ago by
Attachment:  categories.pdf added 

Output of pdflatex after doing setlistdept(10) in categories.tex
comment:62 followup: 64 Changed 9 years ago by
Well, it does compile, but it does not work. Look at the ugly output in categories.pdf.
comment:63 followup: 65 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
OK, after getting a more recent version of the enumitem package, I first get a "too deeply nested" error on categories.tex. However, after doing
\setlistdepth{10}(and not just depth 9), it compiles fine. So, in other words, the problem can be solved.
What? Really? I thought I had tried that. Ah, I see, the level that
you have to put seems to actually have nothing to do with the actual
depth of your itemize. Now I can compile the full categories
documentation, but that requires \setlistdepth{275
}!!! There
must be something wrong in the depthcounting logic of enumitem ...
But I really wonder about the requirement that the user has to have a latex installation with a very recent enumitem. Can this be really required? Or would we be allowed to ship enumitem.sty with Sage?
I would vote for shipping enumitem.sty if that's easy. Jeroen/Volker/?..., can we just throw it in
/opt/sagedev/local/share/texmf/tex/generic
?
Cheers,
Nicolas
comment:64 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
Well, it does compile, but it does not work. Look at the ugly output in categories.pdf.
Nothing to worry about: this filed was obtained by stripping lots of stuff from an actual tex file; I am not surprised it does not look good. On the other hand, I had a look at the full categories.pdf produced by sphinx, and it looked reasonable.
comment:65 followup: 66 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to nthiery:
Now I can compile the full categories documentation, but that requires
\setlistdepth{275
}!!! There must be something wrong in the depthcounting logic of enumitem ...
Ouch. So, if it really turns out that the depthcounting is broken (did you check that the nesting of lists in the created tex file are not broken?), then we should perhaps consider to search for an alternative solution.
For example, is it really needed to use nesting in the resulting tex file? Or could one create a nice layout without nesting? If I understand correctly, we (i.e., Sage) are creating the tex file. Hence, we can control what happens.
I would vote for shipping enumitem.sty if that's easy. Jeroen/Volker/?..., can we just throw it in
/opt/sagedev/local/share/texmf/tex/generic
?
I have already asked on sagedevel...
comment:66 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
I have already asked on sagedevel...
Thanks for the pointer. I answered there.
comment:67 Changed 9 years ago by
Milestone:  sage6.1 → sage6.2 

comment:68 Changed 9 years ago by
Milestone:  sage6.2 → sage6.3 

comment:69 followup: 72 Changed 8 years ago by
Just require enumitems, geez... Afair we already require a number of packages that are not part of a "small"/"medium" TeXLive install. One more doesn't make a difference.
comment:70 Changed 8 years ago by
Branch:  → u/nthiery/nested_class_name_mangling_can_be_wrong_in_case_of_double_nesting 

comment:71 Changed 8 years ago by
Branch:  u/nthiery/nested_class_name_mangling_can_be_wrong_in_case_of_double_nesting 

Yeah, you are right, let's make it simple. I for example had to install a bunch of language packages (russian, ...) to get the pdf doc to install a couple days ago.
First attempt pushed. Compiling the doc and running the tests now.
Cheers,
Nicolas
comment:72 followup: 73 Changed 8 years ago by
Replying to vbraun:
Just require enumitems, geez...
What exactly do you mean? Would it be sufficient to let Sage insert usepackage{enumitem}
(I have not heard about the plural, enumitems
), or will we also need to change the latex code emitted for nested classes? And how?
comment:73 Changed 8 years ago by
Replying to SimonKing:
What exactly do you mean? Would it be sufficient to let Sage insert
usepackage{enumitem}
That's my understanding and what I did in my latest commit. Plus raising the depth limit to a stupidly high value.
There seems to still be some compilation issue, but I guess they are just due to more stuff getting compiled, hence catching glitches that had gone unnoticed so far. I'll check this out tomorrow.
Cheers,
Nicolas
comment:74 Changed 8 years ago by
Branch:  → u/nthiery/nested_class_name_mangling_can_be_wrong_in_case_of_double_nesting 

comment:75 Changed 8 years ago by
Commit:  → 891c3fad654e89e6b96bcf8f79114f631c8b7bba 

Gosh, it turned out that using \setlistdepth{275}
was not sufficient
anymore: I had to use \setlistdepth{2000}
! This meant the problem
would just keep going to be worst and worst with time.
So I investigated a further and got lucky this time: if we replace
list by trivlist in the customized Verbatim defined by sphinx.sty
,
then our documenation compiles smoothly, without even using enumitem.
I proposed this fix upstream:
https://bitbucket.org/birkenfeld/sphinx/issue/777/latexoutputtoodeeplynested
For the time being, I tweaked our conf.py to redefine and fix sphinx's Verbatim.
Ok, now there just remains to check that all tests pass, and this will be a needs review.
Cheers,
Nicolas
New commits:
727bd6a  #9107: Enable nesting of a nested class into a nested class

213e3b1  #9107: Fix one cross reference in the documentation of a functorial construction

66b7e72  #9107: fix a docstring (missing example and raw)

891c3fa  #9107: monkey patch a fix for deeply nested pdflatex compilation error until it's merged upstream (Sphinx #777)

comment:76 followup: 77 Changed 8 years ago by
Is there a reason why you don't patch the sphinx spkg directly?
comment:77 Changed 8 years ago by
Replying to tscrim:
Is there a reason why you don't patch the sphinx spkg directly?
Lazyness mostly. If someone whats to create a patch, adapt the spkg, ... please go ahead!
comment:78 Changed 8 years ago by
Commit:  891c3fad654e89e6b96bcf8f79114f631c8b7bba → ed2c7047aab14dce0abbf22eb531fa0667179982 

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
ed2c704  #9107: updated doctests now that the name of deeply nested classes is finaly correct

comment:79 Changed 8 years ago by
Status:  needs_work → needs_review 

Ok, there were a couple doctest failures, all to be expected since nested classes now have a correct name. Fixed now. So that's a needs review!
comment:80 followup: 82 Changed 8 years ago by
Branch:  u/nthiery/nested_class_name_mangling_can_be_wrong_in_case_of_double_nesting → public/nested_class9107 

Commit:  ed2c7047aab14dce0abbf22eb531fa0667179982 → d6b432b24b3f1fbfc5298fe096a13e095dda8b1f 
Here's a version with a patched version of the sphinx spkg. Although I think your pull request is based on v1.2 (but it still applied (for me) to our current v1.1). Could someone check to make sure I created the patch correctly (and tell me what I should do instead if it isn't right).
New commits:
d6b432b  Moved hack conf.py to proper patch.

comment:81 Changed 8 years ago by
Commit:  d6b432b24b3f1fbfc5298fe096a13e095dda8b1f → 8b14e051c933f2ec2ae9891efbf329e7f0f2cba4 

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
8b14e05  #9107: improved description of Sphinx's patch nested.patch

comment:82 followup: 83 Changed 8 years ago by
Replying to tscrim:
Here's a version with a patched version of the sphinx spkg.
Ah, that's nice: modifying standard spkgs is much simpler now that we have a single repository. Thanks!
Although I think your pull request is based on v1.2 (but it still applied (for me) to our current v1.1). Could someone check to make sure I created the patch correctly (and tell me what I should do instead if it isn't right).
It seems to apply as it's supposed to (modulo trivial line offset).
I have made some minor improvement to the patch description.
I am a bit nervous about the removal of the former change log in SPKG.txt. But if someone can confirm that this is the right thing to do, that's ok for me.
Other than this, this sounds good to go!
Thanks again,
Nicolas
comment:83 Changed 8 years ago by
Replying to nthiery:
I am a bit nervous about the removal of the former change log in SPKG.txt. But if someone can confirm that this is the right thing to do, that's ok for me.
Do it! ;)
comment:84 Changed 8 years ago by
Authors:  Simon King → Simon King, Nicolas M. Thiéry 

Reviewers:  Volker Braun, Florent Hivert → Volker Braun, Florent Hivert, Travis Scrimshaw 
Status:  needs_review → positive_review 
Then away we go.
comment:86 Changed 8 years ago by
Branch:  public/nested_class9107 → 8b14e051c933f2ec2ae9891efbf329e7f0f2cba4 

Resolution:  → fixed 
Status:  positive_review → closed 
comment:87 Changed 7 years ago by
Commit:  8b14e051c933f2ec2ae9891efbf329e7f0f2cba4 

Description:  modified (diff) 
I think we should make this depend on #12808, because it cythonises nested classes.
Here is my analysis:
ClassType
. However, ironically, instances ofNestedClassMetaclass
are ignored.