Division works differently in Python than in Rust. If the result is
negative and there is a remainder, the division rounds down (instead of
towards zero). The remainder needs to be adjusted to compensate so that
`(lhs // rhs) * rhs + (lhs % rhs) == lhs`.
Fixesastral-sh/ty#481.
## Summary
https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/111
This PR adds support for `frozen` dataclasses. It will emit a diagnostic
with a similar message to mypy
Note: This does not include emitting a diagnostic if `__setattr__` or
`__delattr__` are defined on the object as per the
[spec](https://docs.python.org/3/library/dataclasses.html#module-contents)
## Test Plan
mdtest
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <carl@astral.sh>
## Summary
Make sure that the following definitions all lead to the same outcome
(bug originally noticed by @AlexWaygood)
```py
from typing import ClassVar
class Descriptor:
def __get__(self, instance, owner) -> int:
return 42
class C:
a: ClassVar[Descriptor]
b: Descriptor = Descriptor()
c: ClassVar[Descriptor] = Descriptor()
reveal_type(C().a) # revealed: int (previously: int | Descriptor)
reveal_type(C().b) # revealed: int
reveal_type(C().c) # revealed: int
```
## Test Plan
New Markdown tests
## Summary
I think `division-by-zero` is a low-value diagnostic in general; most
real division-by-zero errors (especially those that are less obvious to
the human eye) will occur on values typed as `int`, in which case we
don't issue the diagnostic anyway. Mypy and pyright do not emit this
diagnostic.
Currently the diagnostic is prone to false positives because a) we do
not silence it in unreachable code, and b) we do not implement narrowing
of literals from inequality checks. We will probably fix (a) regardless,
but (b) is low priority apart from division-by-zero.
I think we have many more important things to do and should not allow
false positives on a low-value diagnostic to be a distraction. Not
opposed to re-enabling this diagnostic in future when we can prioritize
reducing its false positives.
References https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/443
## Test Plan
Existing tests.
## Summary
Resolves [#461](https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/461).
ty was hardcoded to infer `BytesLiteral` types for integer indexing into
`BytesLiteral`. It will now infer `IntLiteral` types instead.
## Test Plan
Markdown tests.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/453.
## Summary
Add an additional info diagnostic to `unresolved-import` check to hint
to users that they should make sure their Python environment is properly
configured for ty, linking them to the corresponding doc. This
diagnostic is only shown when an import is not relative, e.g., `import
maturin` not `import .maturin`.
## Test Plan
Updated snapshots with new info message and reran tests.
This implements the stopgap approach described in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/336#issuecomment-2880532213 for
handling literal types in generic class specializations.
With this approach, we will promote any literal to its instance type,
but _only_ when inferring a generic class specialization from a
constructor call:
```py
class C[T]:
def __init__(self, x: T) -> None: ...
reveal_type(C("string")) # revealed: C[str]
```
If you specialize the class explicitly, we still use whatever type you
provide, even if it's a literal:
```py
from typing import Literal
reveal_type(C[Literal[5]](5)) # revealed: C[Literal[5]]
```
And this doesn't apply at all to generic functions:
```py
def f[T](x: T) -> T:
return x
reveal_type(f(5)) # revealed: Literal[5]
```
---
As part of making this happen, we also generalize the `TypeMapping`
machinery. This provides a way to apply a function to type, returning a
new type. Complicating matters is that for function literals, we have to
apply the mapping lazily, since the function's signature is not created
until (and if) someone calls its `signature` method. That means we have
to stash away the mappings that we want to apply to the signatures
parameter/return annotations once we do create it. This requires some
minor `Cow` shenanigans to continue working for partial specializations.
This is a follow-on to #18155. For the example raised in
https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/370:
```py
import tempfile
with tempfile.TemporaryDirectory() as tmp: ...
```
the new logic would notice that both overloads of `TemporaryDirectory`
match, and combine their specializations, resulting in an inferred type
of `str | bytes`.
This PR updates the logic to match our other handling of other calls,
where we only keep the _first_ matching overload. The result for this
example then becomes `str`, matching the runtime behavior. (We still do
not implement the full [overload resolution
algorithm](https://typing.python.org/en/latest/spec/overload.html#overload-call-evaluation)
from the spec.)
## Summary
Add a new diagnostic hint if you try to use PEP 604 `X | Y` union syntax
in a non-type-expression before 3.10.
closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/437
## Test Plan
New snapshot test
This primarily comes up with annotated `self` parameters in
constructors:
```py
class C[T]:
def __init__(self: C[int]): ...
```
Here, we want infer a specialization of `{T = int}` for a call that hits
this overload.
Normally when inferring a specialization of a function call, typevars
appear in the parameter annotations, and not in the argument types. In
this case, this is reversed: we need to verify that the `self` argument
(`C[T]`, as we have not yet completed specialization inference) is
assignable to the parameter type `C[int]`.
To do this, we simply look for a typevar/type in both directions when
performing inference, and apply the inferred specialization to argument
types as well as parameter types before verifying assignability.
As a wrinkle, this exposed that we were not checking
subtyping/assignability for function literals correctly. Our function
literal representation includes an optional specialization that should
be applied to the signature. Before, function literals were considered
subtypes of (assignable to) each other only if they were identical Salsa
objects. Two function literals with different specializations should
still be considered subtypes of (assignable to) each other if those
specializations result in the same function signature (typically because
the function doesn't use the typevars in the specialization).
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/370
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/100
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/258
---------
Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <carl@astral.sh>
## Summary
Support direct uses of `typing.TypeAliasType`, as in:
```py
from typing import TypeAliasType
IntOrStr = TypeAliasType("IntOrStr", int | str)
def f(x: IntOrStr) -> None:
reveal_type(x) # revealed: int | str
```
closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/392
## Ecosystem
The new false positive here:
```diff
+ error[invalid-type-form] altair/utils/core.py:49:53: The first argument to `Callable` must be either a list of types, ParamSpec, Concatenate, or `...`
```
comes from the fact that we infer the second argument as a type
expression now. We silence false positives for PEP695 `ParamSpec`s, but
not for `P = ParamSpec("P")` inside `Callable[P, ...]`.
## Test Plan
New Markdown tests
## Summary
just a minor nit followup to
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/18010 -- put all the
non-`Visitor` methods of `SemanticIndexBuilder` in the same impl block
rather than having multiple impl blocks
## Test Plan
`cargo build`
## Summary
With this PR we now detect that x is always defined in `use`:
```py
if flag and (x := number):
use(x)
```
When outside if, it's still detected as possibly not defined
```py
flag and (x := number)
# error: [possibly-unresolved-reference]
use(x)
```
In order to achieve that, I had to find a way to get access to the
flow-snapshots of the boolean expression when analyzing the flow of the
if statement. I did it by special casing the visitor of boolean
expression to return flow control information, exporting two snapshots -
`maybe_short_circuit` and `no_short_circuit`. When indexing
boolean expression itself we must assume all possible flows, but when
it's inside if statement, we can be smarter than that.
## Test Plan
Fixed existing and added new mdtests.
I went through some of mypy primer results and they look fine
---------
Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <carl@astral.sh>
## Summary
Add various attributes to `NamedTuple` classes/instances that are
available at runtime.
closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/417
## Test Plan
New Markdown tests
## Summary
The PR adds an explicit check for `"__builtins__"` during name lookup,
similar to how `"__file__"` is implemented. The inferred type is
`Any`.
closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/393
## Test Plan
Added a markdown test for `__builtins__`.
---------
Co-authored-by: David Peter <sharkdp@users.noreply.github.com>
This makes an easy tweak to allow our diagnostics for unmatched
overloads to apply to method calls. Previously, they only worked for
function calls.
There is at least one other case worth addressing too, namely, class
literals. e.g., `type()`. We had a diagnostic snapshot test case to
track it.
Closesastral-sh/ty#274
## Summary
Model that `type[C]` is always assignable to `type`, even if `C` is not
fully static.
closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/312
## Test Plan
* New Markdown tests
* Property tests
## Summary
Resolves [#290](https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/290).
All arguments, synthesized or not, are now accounted for in
`too-many-positional-arguments`'s error message.
For example, consider this example:
```python
class C:
def foo(self): ...
C().foo(1) # !!!
```
Previously, ty would say:
> Too many positional arguments to bound method foo: expected 0, got 1
After this change, it will say:
> Too many positional arguments to bound method foo: expected 1, got 2
This is what Python itself does too:
```text
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<python-input-0>", line 3, in <module>
C().foo()
~~~~~~~^^
TypeError: C.foo() takes 0 positional arguments but 1 was given
```
## Test Plan
Markdown tests.
The diagnostic now includes a pointer to the implementation definition
along with each possible overload.
This doesn't include information about *why* each overload failed. But
given the emphasis on concise output (since there can be *many*
unmatched overloads), it's not totally clear how to include that
additional information.
Fixes#274
These are, after all, specific to function types. The methods on `Type`
are more like conveniences that return something when the type *happens*
to be a function. But defining them on `FunctionType` itself makes it
easy to call them when you have a `FunctionType` instead of a `Type`.
I found the previous code somewhat harder to read. Namely, a `for`
loop was being used to encode "execute zero or one times, but not
more." Which is sometimes okay, but it seemed clearer to me to use
more explicit case analysis here.
This should have no behavioral changes.
