python / python/cpython

Inconsistent behavior when validating type parameter substitutions

未关闭
#132,100 2 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

stdlib topic-typing type-bug
主要语言
Python
星标
77.2k
派生
35.9k
PR 合并指标
PR 指标待抓取

描述

Bug report

Bug description:

There are currently three different cases (two of them being closely related) where type parameters can be substituted/parameterized with concrete types:

  • On a user-defined generic class:

    class MyGeneric[T1, T2]: ...
    
    alias = MyGeneric[int, str]
    
  • On an already parameterized alias (following the previous example):

    temp_alias = MyGeneric[int, T2]
    alias = temp_alias[str]
    
  • On a PEP 695 type alias:

    type MyAlias[T1, T2] = dict[T1, T2]
    
    gen_alias = MyAlias[int, str]
    

All of these three cases have slightly different behavior. The one that seems to be the most accurate is the second one. As alias is a _GenericAlias instance, parameterizing it will call _GenericAlias.__getitem__. There is a bunch of logic in there, and it seems that both __typing_prepare_subst__ and then __typing_subst__ (which is only doing type check assertions) are being called.

However, the first case is not making the calls to __typing_subst__, meaning the following would unexpectedly work:

class A[T, **P]: ...

A[int, str]
# ok at runtime, should fail as `P` should be substituted with a valid parameter expression
# (another ParamSpec, the ellipsis, a list/tuple of types or a Concatenate form).

If you do the same on a _GenericAlias instance (matches the second case), an error is raised:

alias = A[T, P]

alias[int, str]
# TypeError: Expected a list of types, an ellipsis, ParamSpec, or Concatenate. Got <class 'str'>

This leads us to the first point: should we apply the same logic between these two cases? To avoid breaking changes, we might have to consider forward references:

class A[T, **P]: ...

A[int, 'ForwardParamSpec']

ForwardParamSpec = ParamSpec('ForwardParamSpec')

So perhaps we can exclude ForwardRef from the type check in ParamSpec.__typing_subst__ (note that it already doesn't work for the second case).

I'll also note that having __typing_subst__ not called is not the only difference. For instance, the second case also calls _unpack_args() on the passed args, while the first case doesn't [^1]


Onto the last case (PEP 695 type aliases), currently no validation is performed whatsoever:

type MyAlias[T1, T2] = dict[T1, T2]

MyAlias[int]  # no error

So the second point is: should we apply the same logic as in case 1/2? Again, I don't know if applying the same logic here on type aliases is going to introduce any breaking changes concerns?

[^1]: Here is an example of how this manifests: https://gist.github.com/Viicos/db10da58914809a87c0a82c1b2f19162

CPython versions tested on:

3.14

Operating systems tested on:

Linux

贡献指南

打开贡献指南

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

调研方向

从 Lib/typing.py 中的 _GenericAlias.getitem、ParamSpec.typing_subst 和 _unpack_args() 开始,然后将这些路径与直接泛型类和 PEP 695 类型别名的替换进行比较。使用报告中的示例确定验证是否应保持一致,包括前向引用,并验证这三种情况下产生的行为。

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

评估

技术栈
python
领域
compilers
Issue 类型
缺陷
难度
5/5
预计耗时
一周以上
活跃度
停滞
描述清晰度
需要澄清
新手友好度
25/100

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。