Allow use of `Required` and `NotRequired` to make an existing typed dict total or optional
未关闭
还没有人认领这个 Issue。
topic: feature
- 主要语言
- Python
- 星标
- 1.8k
- 派生
- 302
- 平均合并
- 23 小时
- 30 天内合并 PR
- 8
描述
I think the ability of indicating that a typed dict requires all keys or that all are optional would be very useful.
For example to allow defining default values for a particular dict or to return a dict that has been completely assigned from a function
A simple example
class A(TypedDict):
a: int
b: int
ADefault = {'a': 1, 'b': 42}
def optionalA(v: NotRequired[A]) -> A:
return ADefault | v
optionalA({'a': 11}) # ok since all keys of NotRequired[A] are optional
class X(TypedDict, total=False):
x: str
y: str
XDefault: X = {"x": "xv", "y": "yv"}
def withXDefault(v: X) -> Required[X]:
return XDefault | v
withXDefault({"x": "foo"})["y"] # ok since all keys of Required[X] are required
This idea is inspired by the analogous types in typescript Required and Partial that are in general very convenient.
I think it makes sense having the same behaviour of the typescript counterparts:
NotRequired[X]is a no op, since X is defined astotal=False. Same forRequired[A].Required/NotRequiredwould include all keys of the typed dict and all its superclasses. This differs from howtotalworks. Example:class TD1(TypedDict): a: int class TD2(TypedDict, total=False): b: int TDR = Required[TD2] # b becomes required TDNR = NotRequired[TD2] # a becomes not requiredRequired/NotRequiredused inline in the TypedDict are not taken into consideration, so the end result is the same independently of how the typed dict is defined
贡献指南
这个仓库没有索引到贡献指南
从这里开始
- 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
- 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
- Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
- 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。
调研方向
首先审查提议的 TypedDict、Required 和 NotRequired 语义以及 issue 中的示例,包括继承和内联注释。定义行为并确定相关的 typing specification 和一致性测试;完成的标准是所请求的转换已得到一致的规范说明和验证。
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
评估
- 技术栈
- python
- 领域
- developer-experience
- Issue 类型
- 功能
- 难度
- 5/5
- 预计耗时
- 一周以上
- 活跃度
- 停滞
- 描述清晰度
- 基本清楚
- 新手友好度
- 35/100