Better support for descriptors at dataclass creation
还没有人认领这个 Issue。
- 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
Feature or enhancement
Proposal:
Hello, I propose a change to the way dataclass works with fields defined using a descriptor class, particularly the way a default value is assigned.
What is the issue
According to the docs:
To determine whether a field contains a default value, @dataclass will call the descriptor’s get() method using its class access form: descriptor.get(obj=None, type=cls). If the descriptor returns a value in this case, it will be used as the field’s default. On the other hand, if the descriptor raises AttributeError in this situation, no default value will be provided for the field.
This behaviour is an issue for descriptors that need to be referenced at class creation: a common pattern in that case is to define the __get__ method with a test so that the descriptor returns itself outside of a call on an instance of the class:
class Descriptor:
...
def __get__(self, instance, instance_type=None):
if instance is None:
return self
...
...
In that case, when the dataclass decorator checks for a default value then self is returned, which means that:
- The field has a default value, when it probably shouldn't,
- The default value is a descriptor instance, which is almost definitely wrong.
Please note that the property builtin is such a descriptor, this is not an edge case. Here is an example using it:
from dataclasses import dataclass
from operator import attrgetter
@dataclass
class A:
a: int = property(attrgetter('_a'))
@a.setter
def a(self, val):
self._a = val
Then:
>>> A(1) # expected behaviour
A(a=1)
>>> A() # unexpected behaviour, but no exception is raised
A(a=<property object at 0x0000027C27023BA0>)
What could be changed ?
I propose adding a check to verify if __get__ returns the descriptor instance itself, to prevent it from using that instance as a default value. However, I am not well versed in the dataclass creation mecanisms, so I am not aware of any consequence it could have.
Is this a breaking change ?
Technically yes. I can't think of any applications where this behaviour could be used, and I don't know how to check if any project on github uses it, but it doesn't change the fact that it breaks backward compatibility.
Has this already been discussed elsewhere?
This is a minor feature, which does not need previous discussion elsewhere
Links to previous discussion of this feature:
No response
Linked PRs
- gh-144940
贡献指南
从这里开始
- 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
- 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
- Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
- 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。
调研方向
从 issue 中描述的 dataclass 创建和 get 行为开始。查看链接的 PR gh-144940,并验证类访问结果是如何作为默认值处理的;完成标准是 descriptor 实例不会在不破坏预期 descriptor 行为的情况下被错误地用作字段默认值。
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
评估
- 技术栈
- python
- 领域
- backend
- Issue 类型
- 功能
- 难度
- 4/5
- 预计耗时
- 3-5 天
- 活跃度
- 停滞
- 描述清晰度
- 基本清楚
- 新手友好度
- 15/100