Relaxing usage of `type` with `typing.Protocol` in typing spec
Personne n'a encore pris cette issue.
- Langage dominant
- Python
- Étoiles
- 1.8k
- Forks
- 302
- Merge moyen
- 23 h
- PR mergées (30 j)
- 8
Description
Some time ago I opened a thread on the Python discourse about implementing an AbstractType semantic that would allow functions to receive non-instantiable types so to try and conform a bit the situation presented in the the thread.
Consider the snippet:
from abc import abstractmethod
from typing import runtime_checkable, Protocol, TypeVar, TypeGuard
@runtime_checkable
class MyProtocol(Protocol):
@abstractmethod
def my_method(self) -> str:
...
class MyClass:
def my_method(self) -> str:
return "Hello from MyClass!"
class MyOtherClass:
def another_method(self) -> str:
return "Hello from MyOtherClass!"
P = TypeVar('P', bound=MyProtocol)
def check_protocol(obj: object, protocol: type[P]) -> TypeGuard[P]:
return isinstance(obj, protocol)
# Example usage
my_obj = MyClass()
my_other_obj = MyOtherClass()
if check_protocol(my_obj, MyProtocol):
print(my_obj.my_method())
if check_protocol(my_other_obj, MyProtocol):
print(my_other_obj.my_method())
else:
print("Object does not implement MyProtocol.")
Output:
Hello from MyClass!
my_obj does not implement MyOtherClass protocol.
At runtime, this works as intended. At type checking time, mypy complains that check_protocol cannot accept a non-instantiable type, while pyright and ty are accepting this behavior.
According to the typing specification, mypy is technically correct (the best kind of correct), but this code is perfectly acceptable. There are other examples referenced in python/mypy#4717 (which is the 3rd most upvoted issue by 👍 by the way).
I was hoping for more discussion points presented in the thread but not many replied. I didn't want to monopolize it, so I'm trying my luck here.
@JelleZijlstra (sorry for the ping) did point out that it might be worthwhile to change the spec to allow this behavior but I'm guessing there should be some discussion on how to deal with it first. Jelle suggested: "If you want it to be instantiable, use Callable[] instead."
I do agree it makes sense, but this snippet:
from typing import Protocol
class MyProtocol(Protocol):
def method(self) -> str:
...
print(callable(MyProtocol)) # prints True
confuses me.
So my point is: could the spec allow for type to accept non-instantiable types, since it seems to be a pretty common pattern? Is there a way to effectively deal with the separation between instantiable and non-instantiable types?
I tried adding the "typing spec" label but couldn't. At any rate, thank you for the consideration.
Guide de contribution
Aucun guide de contribution indexé pour ce dépôt
Par où commencer
- Lisez l'issue en entier, puis le guide de contribution du projet.
- Signalez en commentaire que vous la prenez — cela évite que deux personnes fassent le même travail.
- Forkez le dépôt et travaillez sur une branche.
- Ouvrez une pull request qui référence le numéro de l'issue.
Piste de recherche
Commencez par la discussion sur la spécification de typing et le fil Python Discourse associé, puis comparez le comportement décrit pour mypy, pyright et ty. Consultez mypy#4717 pour des exemples connexes. Le travail est terminé lorsqu’un accord est trouvé sur la question de savoir si type[P] peut accepter des types Protocol non instanciables et que la règle qui en découle est documentée.
Rédigé par le modèle d'indexation à partir du texte de l'issue.
Évaluation
- Stack technique
- python
- Domaine
- documentation
- Type d'issue
- Fonctionnalité
- Difficulté
- 5/5
- Temps estimé
- Plus d'une semaine
- Activité
- Calme
- Clarté
- À clarifier
- Accessibilité débutants
- 35/100