code in `_Call.__new__`:

      def __new__(cls, value=(), name=None, parent=None, two=False,                                                                    
      ¦   ¦   ¦   from_kall=True):                                                                                                     
      ¦   name = ''                                                                                                                    
      ¦   args = ()                                                                                                                    
      ¦   kwargs = {}                                                                                                                  
      ¦   _len = len(value)                                                                                                            
      ¦   if _len == 3:                                                                                                                
              ...

the parameter `name` had been override since the function starts. so whatever name is, it's been ignored. Is it a bug? or something else?

That indeed looks like a bug. Well spotted :)

That code has been there since unittest.mock was added back in March 2012. If I were to guess, I'd say that it should be `if name is None: name = ''`. Care to submit a patch?

Thanks for reply :) the patch has been uploaded.

update the patch file follow the doc(https://docs.python.org/devguide/gitdevs.html)

The new patch has been updated. :)

Thanks for the patch, Jiajun. The _Call class is tested in CallTest (located in Lib/unittest/test/testmock/testhelpers.py) Would it be possible to add a test case to make sure that we actually fixed the bug?

I think we can write `_Call.__new__` as:

def __new__(cls, value=(), name='',...)

it's much simpler and readable.

code and test case has been updated.

hi, do this need more test case or something else to be merged? please let me know :)

Please remove "import ipdb; ipdb.set_trace() # TODO remove it" before posting patches ;-)

sorry about that, fixed.

The patch looks good to me. There are some styling issues in the test code (e.g. no need to add trailing spaces after commas in some cases), but I can take care of them before committing the patch :) Thanks!

The latest patch (Jiajun Huang, 2017-01-03 14:34) LGTM.

Yep, LGTM as well. Nicely spotted!

New changeset 50424a903593 by Victor Stinner in branch '3.6':
Fix unittest.mock._Call: don't ignore name
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/50424a903593

I applied the latest mock.patch to Python 3.6 and default (future 3.7). I prefer to wait for the 3.5.3 release before backporting the fix to 3.5, the fix is minor, I don't want to annoy the release manager yet.

IIRC 3.5.3rc1 is already tagged so the 3.5 branch is open for 3.5.4. Anything that needs to be in 3.5.3 should be cherry-picked by the RM at this point if I'm not mistaken (and note that I don't have time check, but 3.5.3 may be the last bugfix release of 3.5 series so you may just skip 3.5 :))

Like I already said in msg284589, the test code doesn't follow the current style in Lib/unittest/test/testmock/testhelpers.py and it can be simplified like the following patch:

     def test_call_with_name(self):
-        self.assertEqual(
-            'foo',
-            _Call((), 'foo')[0],
-        )
-        self.assertEqual(
-            '',
-            _Call((('bar', 'barz'), ), )[0]
-        )
-        self.assertEqual(
-            '',
-            _Call((('bar', 'barz'), {'hello': 'world'}), )[0]
-        )
+        self.assertEqual(_Call((), 'foo')[0], 'foo')
+        self.assertEqual(_Call((('bar', 'barz'),),)[0], '')
+        self.assertEqual(_Call((('bar', 'barz'), {'hello': 'world'}),)[0], '')

New changeset fae59e1aa87ee9598d032e0bd697969a5784025f by Berker Peksag in branch '3.6':
bpo-28961: Address my comments from earlier code review (#306)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/fae59e1aa87ee9598d032e0bd697969a5784025f

New changeset 5aa3856b4f325457e8ec1ccf669369f543e1f6b5 by Berker Peksag in branch 'master':
bpo-28961: Address my comments from earlier code review (#305)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/5aa3856b4f325457e8ec1ccf669369f543e1f6b5