Should dict() constructor overloads be more permissive?

Current constructor overloads are here:

https://github.com/python/typeshed/blob/e80ad6b2bce7ef6b2a20aec2d79a672859b31864/stdlib/builtins.pyi#L1041-L1046

Someone took care to allow specific positive case, and to block specific negative case.
Many potential valid uses have fallen through the cracks:

dict([[1, 2]])
dict("AT TA GC CG".split())
dict([["str", b"bytes"]])

My understanding of the issue is that there's no way to specify sequence length (other than a tuple) in a type hint, that is there's no syntax to hint ["a", "b"] vs ["a", "b", "c"].

This brings a philosophical question: what side should typeshed err on when type hint syntax is not precise enough?

• type whatever Python may accept run time, or
• restrict users to what Python is guaranteed to accept at run time?

It was mentioned at https://github.com/microsoft/pyright/issues/7382 that type checkers trust typeshed, and thus the question belongs here.

My personal preference would be for permissive type hints in these cases.

リンクされている dict() コンストラクターのオーバーロードがある stdlib/builtins.pyi から始め、issue の呼び出し例と比較してください。関連する型チェッカーがそれらのケースをどのように扱うかを確認し、そのうえで、意図されている方針が実行時に有効なより広範な入力を受け入れることかどうかを判断してください。完了には、合意されたオーバーロード設計と対応する検証が必要です。