Annotations for Type factories
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 1.8k
- Forks
- 302
- Avg merge
- 23h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 8
Description
Context: at my company, we have a wildly used framework that at the time of writing didn't consider good static type hints for the framework users as one of the design objectives.
It makes use of the "type factory" pattern that could be illustrated with the following (much simplified) example
# framework code
# `make_int_in_range_class` is a "type factory" method
def make_int_in_range_class(lower: int, upper: int):
# imagine here some very elaborated machinery that constructs the type dynamically
class IntInRange(int):
def __init__(self, v: int) -> None:
if v < lower or v > upper:
raise ValueError("not in range")
self.v = v
# many more methods like
def custom_serialization() -> bytes:
return b"foo"
return IntInRange
# user code in another file
MyIntInRange = make_int_in_range_class(0, 10) # Create the `MyIntInRange` Type
def foo(x: MyIntInRange) -> None: # use `MyIntInRange` type in the annotation
print(x)
foo(MyIntInRange(4)) # example usage
When I run mypy on this code I'm rightfully getting
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
demo.py: note: In function "foo":
demo.py:12:12: error: Variable
"robotypes_toy_generic.demo.MyIntInRange" is not valid as a type [valid-type]
def foo(x: MyIntInRange) -> None:
^
demo.py:12:12: note: See https://mypy.readthedocs.io/en/latest/common_issues.html#variables-vs-type-aliases
Found 1 error in 1 file (checked 1 source file)
Note that Pyright seems to be more permissive here and doesn't error out, but this seems to be a non-standard behavior from PEPs point of view.
The goal of having the type hint at the first place in this code is 2 fold:
- Documentation.
- We could not afford yet to enable globally the
check_untyped_defs = Trueflag, too many errors. But I'd like to remove one obstacle from getting type check coverage in the new code, so it's desirable to have the type hints (however poor they could be). And I'd like to avoid having excessive use ofAnyortype: ignore[untyped-def].
Ideally, I'd like to have some syntax to tell any type checker that make_int_in_range_class produces a valid type (let's say even Any to make things simple, but maybe it could be some Protocol).
I was not able to find a good way of doing it short of asking ALL USERS to write some typing lie like
if TYPE_CHECKING:
MyIntInRange = Any
else:
MyIntInRange = make_int_in_range_class(0, 10) # Create the `MyIntInRange` Type
This is kind of a sad solution and also we have something like 1000 call sites that would need to be updated like that.
So I'm looking for advice on how this could be addressed on the framework level OR if people think it's not too fringy, maybe we could add a new feature in typing for that.
I was imagining that it could be possible to make something like this work
def make_int_in_range_class() -> Type[Any]:
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
The issue names no repository file or test; start with the simplified type-factory example and the mypy valid-type diagnostic. Compare the proposed Type[Any] annotation with the typing behavior described in the issue, and consider the work complete only when a concrete typing change or documented guidance is agreed.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- developer-experience
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100