pyo3(get, set) attribute not found when using cfg_attr

[Waelwindows]

🐛 Bug Reports

When reporting a bug, please provide the following information. If this is not a bug report you can just discard this template.

🌍 Environment

• Your operating system and version: Arch Linux x86_64 5.7.4-arch1-1
• Your python version: Python 3.8.3
• How did you install python (e.g. apt or pyenv)? Did you use a virtualenv?: pacman
• Your Rust version (rustc --version): rustc 1.46.0-nightly (6bb3dbfc6 2020-06-22)
• Your PyO3 version: 0.10.1
• Have you tried using latest PyO3 master (replace version = "0.x.y" with git = "https://github.com/PyO3/pyo3")?: No

💥 Reproducing

Please provide a minimal working example. This means both the Rust code and the Python.

This compiles

#[cfg_attr(feature="pyo3", pyclass)]
#[derive(Debug, Default)]
pub struct Foo {
    #[pyo3(get, set)]
    bar: bool,
}

However, this doesn't

#[cfg_attr(feature="pyo3", pyclass)]
#[derive(Debug, Default)]
pub struct Foo {
    #[cfg_attr(feature="pyo3", pyo3(get, set))]
    bar: bool,
}

Because it can't find the pyo3 attribute

error: cannot find attribute `pyo3` in this scope
  --> src/material/texture/mod.rs:45:32
   |
45 |     #[cfg_attr(feature="pyo3", pyo3(get, set))]
   |                                ^^^^

Please also write what exact flags are required to reproduce your results.

[birkenfeld]

This is basically a duplicate of #780.

[davidhewitt]

Based on #780 (comment) I wonder if we can resolve this by changing #[pyclass] expansion to (among other things) add a #[derive(PyClassImpl)] or something like that. Where the PyClassImpl derive macro would apparently be called with all cfg_attr attributes resolved.

This is kind of a hack, though, so I wonder if really we should be asking the compiler team if it's reasonable to expand all #[cfg_attr] clauses before calling custom attributes (as it already appears to do that for derive).

[davidhewitt]

Looks like the compiler team may indeed be doing that rust-lang/rust#83824

[cgranade]

Is there a suggested workaround for this issue until that compiler feature lands? Thanks for the help!

[mejrs]

Is there a suggested workaround for this issue until that compiler feature lands? Thanks for the help!

You can manually implement getters/setters, and guard that block with a cfg:

#[cfg_attr(feature = "pyo3", pyclass)]
struct Foo{
    bar: u8
}

#[cfg(feature = "pyo3")]
#[pymethods]
impl Foo{
    // not named "bar" because there might already a rust getter for it
    #[getter(bar)]
    fn py_bar(&self) -> u8{
        self.bar
    }
}

I've had to do this for structs with hundreds of fields - not fun. Note that you may need to apply .clone() for fields that are not Copy.

[Trolldemorted]

@mejrs get_all is awesome, thank you very much! If I hadn't scrolled until here, I would not have known. Maybe this should be documented somewhere more easy to find?

[mejrs]

It is listed at https://pyo3.rs/v0.18.3/class.html#customizing-the-class I'm not sure where else this information should be. Where were you looking for it?

[Trolldemorted]

oh sorry, I thought the "pyo3(get,set) doesn't work with cfg_attr" problem was mentioned in the FAQs - if it is included in the future I'd recommend a sentence that suggests get_all as a workaround.

[hugohadfieldwayve]

For those stumbling upon this, here is a super explicit example with get_all and cfg_attr

#[cfg_attr(feature = "pyo3", pyclass(get_all))]
pub struct MyStruct {
    pub my_field_a: f32,
    pub my_field_b: f32
}