-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.2k
Fix isinstance on namedtuple type aliases #21103
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
paulorochaoliveira
wants to merge
2
commits into
python:master
Choose a base branch
from
paulorochaoliveira:bug/namedtuple-typealias-isinstance
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+19
−0
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I feel like
no_argsshould beTruein this case? In which case this if statement is fine.I'd rather that, unless there's a good reason for existing behavior...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@A5rocks, I considered that, but
no_argscurrently seems to mean more than “this alias was written without subscripting”.In particular, it appears to assume an
Instancetarget in a few places:mypy/types.py(TypeAliasType._expand_once)mypy/typeanal.py(instantiate_type_alias)mypy/semanal.pyFor aliases to classes inheriting from
NamedTuple, the target is aTupleTypewith a namedtuple fallback rather than anInstance, so makingno_args=Truehere would likely require broadening that invariant first.Because of that, I went with the narrower fix in the
isinstancecheck path. If you’d prefer, I can rework this to makeno_argssupport namedtuple-backed aliases more generally, but that seemed like a larger behavioral change than needed for this bug.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's interesting! I had assumed this already worked for tuples but actually they don't work at runtime! I guess I agree that
no_argsis the wrong approach then. This still feels a bit hacky though so I'll think a bit more... But as a first comment, could you add a test to show that you didn't modify the following output?:(your code shouldn't have changed that, but unless that's already a test it's better to prevent people like me from modifying this without knowing the runtime behavior!)