python / python/mypy

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

未關閉
#12,653 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。

bug
主要語言
Python
星號
20.6k
分支
3.3k
PR 合併指標
PR 指標待擷取

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)

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

首先,使用 strict=true 重現最小的泛型 dataclass 和 Callable 範例,比較直接建構與傳遞給 append_to_list 的建構。追蹤 dataclass 建構函式和函式引數的泛型型別推論,然後新增回歸涵蓋範圍,顯示這兩種形式都會拒絕不相容的 Callable 關係。

由索引模型根據 Issue 內容生成。

評估

技術堆疊
python
領域
devtools
Issue 類型
缺陷
難度
4/5
預估耗時
3-5 天
活躍度
停滯
描述清晰度
基本清楚
新手友好度
35/100

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。