python / python/mypy

Relation constraints between generic callables in a generic dataclass are ignored when constructed in a function call

未关闭
#12,653 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。

bug
主要语言
Python
星标
20.6k
派生
3.3k
PR 合并指标
PR 指标待抓取

描述

Bug Report

Apologies for the lengthy issue title, but I'm not really sure what to call this. Here is the problematic behavior: Suppose I have two related Generic Callables, Callable[[T1], T2] and Callable[[T2], T3]. These callables are packaged together in a dataclass that is parameterized on T1, T2, and T3. For instance:

T1 = TypeVar("T1")
T2 = TypeVar("T2")
T3 = TypeVar("T3")

@dataclass
class FunctionRelation(Generic[T1, T2, T3]):
    func1: Callable[[T1], T2]
    func2: Callable[[T2], T3]

I believe it should be an error to construct an instance of the dataclass such that the return-type of the first callable is not the argument type of the second callable. As far as I can tell, this does work correctly in a simple case.

def func_str_int(x: str) -> int:
    return int(x)

def func_int_str(x: int) -> str:
    return str(x)

def func_str_str(x: str) -> str:
    return x

FunctionRelation(func1=func_str_int, func2=func_int_str)  # OK
FunctionRelation(func1=func_str_int, func2=func_str_str)  # Expected error - Cannot infer T2

However, Mypy incorrectly accepts the bad relation if the dataclass is simply initialized in a function call:

relations: list[FunctionRelation[Any, Any, Any]] = []

def append_to_list(relation: FunctionRelation[T1, T2, T3]) -> None:
    relations.append(relation)

append_to_list(FunctionRelation(func1=func_str_int, func2=func_int_str))  # OK
append_to_list(FunctionRelation(func1=func_str_int, func2=func_str_str))  # Incorrectly accepted by Mypy!
relation = FunctionRelation(func1=func_str_int, func2=func_str_str)  # Expected error
append_to_list(relation)

FWIW, although Mypy accepts the above example, append_to_list(FunctionRelation(func1=func_str_int, func2=func_str_str)) it is (correctly) identified as an error by Pyright, though Pyright does warn against invalid TypeVar use in the function signature. If the signature is changed from FunctionRelation[T1, T2, T3] to FunctionRelation[Any, Any, Any], then neither Mypy nor Pyright complain, which I believe to be incorrect behavior from both type checkers.

It is very possible my understanding of the expected behavior of Mypy is incorrect here, but there does seem to be an inconsistency in how the types are being treated when a function signature can change the type validity of an object passed to that function, even before the function is called. If this is expected, I would sincerely appreciate help understanding why.

Expected Behavior
If I construct a dataclass D with the following spec

@dataclass
class D(Generic[T1, T2, T3]):
    func1: Callable[[T1], T2]
    func2: Callable[[T2], T3]

and I have a function F that accepts a D (regardless of how D is parameterized), then I expect that
IF a statement which constructs a D fails type checking,
THEN a statement that constructs a D and passes it to F should ALSO fail type checking.

Actual Behavior
It is possible to construct a D that fails type checking, but to pass type checking by constructing that same D at the same time as passing it to F.

Your Environment

  • Mypy version used: (mypy 0.960+dev.6eac2403f68e33e317c9f17b434d322291e60543 (compiled: no))
  • Mypy command-line flags: None
  • Mypy configuration options from mypy.ini (and other config files): strict = true
  • Python version used: 3.10.4
  • Operating system and version: Arch Linux (5.17.3.arch1-1)

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

首先,使用 strict=true 复现最小的泛型 dataclass 和 Callable 示例,比较直接构造与传递给 append_to_list 的构造。跟踪 dataclass 构造函数和函数参数的泛型类型推断,然后添加回归覆盖,证明这两种形式都会拒绝不兼容的 Callable 关系。

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

评估

技术栈
python
领域
devtools
Issue 类型
缺陷
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
35/100

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。