python / python/cpython

Inconsistent behavior when validating type parameter substitutions

未關閉
#132,100 2 則留言 0 個 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 檢視

還沒有人認領這個 Issue。

stdlib topic-typing type-bug
主要語言
Python
星號
77.2k
分支
36k
PR 合併指標
PR 指標待擷取

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

貢獻指南

開啟貢獻指南

從這裡開始

  1. 先讀完整個 Issue,再讀專案的貢獻指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言說明你要接手 —— 這能避免兩個人做同樣的事。
  3. Fork 儲存庫,在一個分支上完成修改。
  4. 送出 Pull Request,並在描述裡引用這個 Issue 編號。

研究方向

從 Lib/typing.py 中的 _GenericAlias.getitem、ParamSpec.typing_subst 和 _unpack_args() 開始,接著將這些路徑與直接泛型類別和 PEP 695 型別別名的替換進行比較。使用報告中的範例判斷驗證是否應保持一致,包括前向參照,並驗證這三種情況下產生的行為。

由索引模型根據 Issue 內容生成。

評估

技術堆疊
python
領域
compilers
Issue 類型
缺陷
難度
5/5
預估耗時
一週以上
活躍度
停滯
描述清晰度
需要釐清
新手友好度
25/100

把新 issue 寄到你的電子郵件信箱

精選適合新手參與的 GitHub issue 摘要。