Annotations for Type factories
まだ誰も着手していません。
- 主要言語
- Python
- スター
- 1.8k
- フォーク
- 302
- 平均マージ
- 23時間
- マージ済み PR(30日)
- 8
説明
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]:
コントリビューションガイド
このリポジトリのコントリビューションガイドは索引されていません
はじめの一歩
- issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
- 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
- リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
- issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。
調査の方向性
この issue ではリポジトリのファイルもテストも指定されていないため、簡略化した type-factory の例と mypy の valid-type 診断から始めてください。提案されている Type[Any] アノテーションを、issue で説明されている typing の動作と比較し、具体的な型付けの変更または文書化されたガイダンスについて合意できた場合にのみ、作業が完了したとみなしてください。
索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。
評価
- 技術スタック
- python
- 領域
- developer-experience
- issue の種類
- 機能追加
- 難易度
- 5/5
- 見積もり時間
- 1週間以上
- 活発さ
- 停滞
- 明瞭さ
- 説明が足りない
- 初心者へのやさしさ
- 25/100