def Fire(component=None, command=None, name=None, serialize=None, supress_output=False):
...
if not supress_output:
_PrintResult(
component_trace, verbose=component_trace.verbose, serialize=serialize)
Why?
Let's try to wrap a function that returns a pd.DataFrame with Fire:
import pandas as pd
from os import PathLike
from fire import Fire
from functools import wraps
def do_stuff_with_df(path: PathLike) -> pd.DataFrame:
df = pd.read_csv(path)
print("***Print inside func***")
# Do stuff here, save .csv and such.
...
# return for usage in other funcs
return df
if __name__ == "__main__":
Fire(do_stuff_with_df)
And this is the output.
python .\test.py --path dummy.csv
***Print inside func***
NAME
test.py --path dummy.csv - Two-dimensional, size-mutable, potentially heterogeneous tabular data.
SYNOPSIS
test.py --path dummy.csv GROUP | COMMAND | VALUE
DESCRIPTION
Data structure also contains labeled axes (rows and columns).
Arithmetic operations align on both row and column labels. Can be
thought of as a dict-like container for Series objects. The primary
pandas data structure.
(We can scroll down for more!)
...
We get a description of pd.DataFrame. And we have to press Q enter normal terminal again.
That's quite inconvenient. A user would have to create and apply wrapper to not get this description.
I second this. It is very annoying when trying to return objects from a function called by Fire() and is an easy fix that does not change the default behavior at all.
I propose we allow to supress output.
Why?
Let's try to wrap a function that returns a
pd.DataFrame
withFire
:And this is the output.
We get a description of pd.DataFrame. And we have to press
Q
enter normal terminal again. That's quite inconvenient. A user would have to create and apply wrapper to not get this description.