Does `field_specifier` support non-keyword arguments?
还没有人认领这个 Issue。
- 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 was reading through the specification of dataclass_transform and it doesn't really specify what field_specifiers looks like. It mostly just says:
field_specifiers (tuple[Callable[..., Any], ...]) – Specifies a static list of supported classes or functions that describe fields, similar to dataclasses.field(). Defaults to ().
But dataclasses.field takes keyword-only arguments, which leaves it a bit ambiguous about whether positional arguments are ok. For example:
from typing import dataclass_transform, Any
def custom_field(default: object, *, init: bool = True) -> Any: ...
@dataclass_transform(field_specifiers=(custom_field,))
def build(x): ...
@build
class A:
x: int = custom_field(default=0)
@build
class B:
x: int = custom_field(0)
A()
B()
pyrefly, pyright, and mypy all flag B() as an error while ty accepts it without complaint.
My (uninformed) take is that this should be allowed -- custom_field(default=0) and custom_field(0) have the same runtime effect, so it feels like they should have the same type-checking effect too. This also matches how pydantic and attrs works (e.g. you can do pydantic.Field(1) and attr.ib(0)) -- today I suspect the type-checkers are special-casing this to make pydantic and attrs (since I've definitely used both without running into static type-checking errors about missing default values before).
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
从 dataclass_transform 规范及其 field_specifiers 定义入手;比较 pyrefly、pyright、mypy 和 ty 中的位置参数与关键字参数示例。确定是否应允许位置参数,然后在 typing specification 中记录这一决定;如果项目有相应示例或一致性测试,则添加一个。
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
评估
- 技术栈
- python
- 领域
- documentation
- Issue 类型
- 文档
- 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