
## Summary Adds meta information to `Type::Todo`, allowing developers to easily trace back the origin of a particular `@Todo` type they encounter. Instead of `Type::Todo`, we now write either `type_todo!()` which creates a `@Todo[path/to/source.rs:123]` type with file and line information, or using `type_todo!("PEP 604 unions not supported")`, which creates a variant with a custom message. `Type::Todo` now contains a `TodoType` field. In release mode, this is just a zero-sized struct, in order not to create any overhead. In debug mode, this is an `enum` that contains the meta information. `Type` implements `Copy`, which means that `TodoType` also needs to be copyable. This limits the design space. We could intern `TodoType`, but I discarded this option, as it would require us to have access to the salsa DB everywhere we want to use `Type::Todo`. And it would have made the macro invocations less ergonomic (requiring us to pass `db`). So for now, the meta information is simply a `&'static str` / `u32` for the file/line variant, or a `&'static str` for the custom message. Anything involving a chain/backtrace of several `@Todo`s or similar is therefore currently not implemented. Also because we currently don't see any direct use cases for this, and because all of this will eventually go away. Note that the size of `Type` increases from 16 to 24 bytes, but only in debug mode. ## Test Plan - Observed the changes in Markdown tests. - Added custom messages for all `Type::Todo`s that were revealed in the tests - Ran red knot in release and debug mode on the following Python file: ```py def f(x: int) -> int: reveal_type(x) ``` Prints `@Todo` in release mode and `@Todo(function parameter type)` in debug mode.
11 KiB
Binary operations on instances
Binary operations in Python are implemented by means of magic double-underscore methods.
For references, see:
- https://snarky.ca/unravelling-binary-arithmetic-operations-in-python/
- https://docs.python.org/3/reference/datamodel.html#emulating-numeric-types
Operations
We support inference for all Python's binary operators: +
, -
, *
, @
, /
, //
, %
, **
,
<<
, >>
, &
, ^
, and |
.
class A:
def __add__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __sub__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __mul__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __matmul__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __truediv__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __floordiv__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __mod__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __pow__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __lshift__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rshift__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __and__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __xor__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __or__(self, other) -> A:
return self
class B: ...
reveal_type(A() + B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() - B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() * B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() @ B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() / B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() // B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() % B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() ** B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() << B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() >> B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() & B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() ^ B()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(A() | B()) # revealed: A
Reflected
We also support inference for reflected operations:
class A:
def __radd__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rsub__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rmul__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rmatmul__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rtruediv__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rfloordiv__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rmod__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rpow__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rlshift__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rrshift__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rand__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __rxor__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __ror__(self, other) -> A:
return self
class B: ...
reveal_type(B() + A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() - A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() * A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() @ A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() / A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() // A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() % A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() ** A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() << A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() >> A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() & A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() ^ A()) # revealed: A
reveal_type(B() | A()) # revealed: A
Returning a different type
The magic methods aren't required to return the type of self
:
class A:
def __add__(self, other) -> int:
return 1
def __rsub__(self, other) -> int:
return 1
class B: ...
reveal_type(A() + B()) # revealed: int
reveal_type(B() - A()) # revealed: int
Non-reflected precedence in general
In general, if the left-hand side defines __add__
and the right-hand side defines __radd__
and
the right-hand side is not a subtype of the left-hand side, lhs.__add__
will take precedence:
class A:
def __add__(self, other: B) -> int:
return 42
class B:
def __radd__(self, other: A) -> str:
return "foo"
reveal_type(A() + B()) # revealed: int
# Edge case: C is a subtype of C, *but* if the two sides are of *equal* types,
# the lhs *still* takes precedence
class C:
def __add__(self, other: C) -> int:
return 42
def __radd__(self, other: C) -> str:
return "foo"
reveal_type(C() + C()) # revealed: int
Reflected precedence for subtypes (in some cases)
If the right-hand operand is a subtype of the left-hand operand and has a different implementation of the reflected method, the reflected method on the right-hand operand takes precedence.
class A:
def __add__(self, other) -> str:
return "foo"
def __radd__(self, other) -> str:
return "foo"
class MyString(str): ...
class B(A):
def __radd__(self, other) -> MyString:
return MyString()
reveal_type(A() + B()) # revealed: MyString
# N.B. Still a subtype of `A`, even though `A` does not appear directly in the class's `__bases__`
class C(B): ...
reveal_type(A() + C()) # revealed: MyString
Reflected precedence 2
If the right-hand operand is a subtype of the left-hand operand, but does not override the reflected method, the left-hand operand's non-reflected method still takes precedence:
class A:
def __add__(self, other) -> str:
return "foo"
def __radd__(self, other) -> int:
return 42
class B(A): ...
reveal_type(A() + B()) # revealed: str
Only reflected supported
For example, at runtime, (1).__add__(1.2)
is NotImplemented
, but (1.2).__radd__(1) == 2.2
,
meaning that 1 + 1.2
succeeds at runtime (producing 2.2
). The runtime tries the second one only
if the first one returns NotImplemented
to signal failure.
Typeshed and other stubs annotate dunder-method calls that would return NotImplemented
as being
"illegal" calls. int.__add__
is annotated as only "accepting" int
s, even though it
strictly-speaking "accepts" any other object without raising an exception -- it will simply return
NotImplemented
, allowing the runtime to try the __radd__
method of the right-hand operand as
well.
class A:
def __sub__(self, other: A) -> A:
return A()
class B:
def __rsub__(self, other: A) -> B:
return B()
# TODO: this should be `B` (the return annotation of `B.__rsub__`),
# because `A.__sub__` is annotated as only accepting `A`,
# but `B.__rsub__` will accept `A`.
reveal_type(A() - B()) # revealed: A
Callable instances as dunders
Believe it or not, this is supported at runtime:
class A:
def __call__(self, other) -> int:
return 42
class B:
__add__ = A()
reveal_type(B() + B()) # revealed: int
Integration test: numbers from typeshed
reveal_type(3j + 3.14) # revealed: complex
reveal_type(4.2 + 42) # revealed: float
reveal_type(3j + 3) # revealed: complex
# TODO should be complex, need to check arg type and fall back to `rhs.__radd__`
reveal_type(3.14 + 3j) # revealed: float
# TODO should be float, need to check arg type and fall back to `rhs.__radd__`
reveal_type(42 + 4.2) # revealed: int
# TODO should be complex, need to check arg type and fall back to `rhs.__radd__`
reveal_type(3 + 3j) # revealed: int
def returns_int() -> int:
return 42
def returns_bool() -> bool:
return True
x = returns_bool()
y = returns_int()
reveal_type(x + y) # revealed: int
reveal_type(4.2 + x) # revealed: float
# TODO should be float, need to check arg type and fall back to `rhs.__radd__`
reveal_type(y + 4.12) # revealed: int
With literal types
When we have a literal type for one operand, we're able to fall back to the instance handling for its instance super-type.
class A:
def __add__(self, other) -> A:
return self
def __radd__(self, other) -> A:
return self
reveal_type(A() + 1) # revealed: A
# TODO should be `A` since `int.__add__` doesn't support `A` instances
reveal_type(1 + A()) # revealed: int
reveal_type(A() + "foo") # revealed: A
# TODO should be `A` since `str.__add__` doesn't support `A` instances
# TODO overloads
reveal_type("foo" + A()) # revealed: @Todo(return type)
reveal_type(A() + b"foo") # revealed: A
# TODO should be `A` since `bytes.__add__` doesn't support `A` instances
reveal_type(b"foo" + A()) # revealed: bytes
reveal_type(A() + ()) # revealed: A
# TODO this should be `A`, since `tuple.__add__` doesn't support `A` instances
reveal_type(() + A()) # revealed: @Todo(return type)
literal_string_instance = "foo" * 1_000_000_000
# the test is not testing what it's meant to be testing if this isn't a `LiteralString`:
reveal_type(literal_string_instance) # revealed: LiteralString
reveal_type(A() + literal_string_instance) # revealed: A
# TODO should be `A` since `str.__add__` doesn't support `A` instances
# TODO overloads
reveal_type(literal_string_instance + A()) # revealed: @Todo(return type)
Operations involving instances of classes inheriting from Any
Any
and Unknown
represent a set of possible runtime objects, wherein the bounds of the set are
unknown. Whether the left-hand operand's dunder or the right-hand operand's reflected dunder depends
on whether the right-hand operand is an instance of a class that is a subclass of the left-hand
operand's class and overrides the reflected dunder. In the following example, because of the
unknowable nature of Any
/Unknown
, we must consider both possibilities: Any
/Unknown
might
resolve to an unknown third class that inherits from X
and overrides __radd__
; but it also might
not. Thus, the correct answer here for the reveal_type
is int | Unknown
.
from does_not_exist import Foo # error: [unresolved-import]
reveal_type(Foo) # revealed: Unknown
class X:
def __add__(self, other: object) -> int:
return 42
class Y(Foo): ...
# TODO: Should be `int | Unknown`; see above discussion.
reveal_type(X() + Y()) # revealed: int
Unsupported
Dunder as instance attribute
The magic method must exist on the class, not just on the instance:
def add_impl(self, other) -> int:
return 1
class A:
def __init__(self):
self.__add__ = add_impl
# error: [unsupported-operator] "Operator `+` is unsupported between objects of type `A` and `A`"
# revealed: Unknown
reveal_type(A() + A())
Missing dunder
class A: ...
# error: [unsupported-operator]
# revealed: Unknown
reveal_type(A() + A())
Wrong position
A left-hand dunder method doesn't apply for the right-hand operand, or vice versa:
class A:
def __add__(self, other) -> int: ...
class B:
def __radd__(self, other) -> int: ...
class C: ...
# error: [unsupported-operator]
# revealed: Unknown
reveal_type(C() + A())
# error: [unsupported-operator]
# revealed: Unknown
reveal_type(B() + C())
Reflected dunder is not tried between two objects of the same type
For the specific case where the left-hand operand is the exact same type as the right-hand operand, the reflected dunder of the right-hand operand is not tried; the runtime short-circuits after trying the unreflected dunder of the left-hand operand. For context, see this mailing list discussion.
class Foo:
def __radd__(self, other: Foo) -> Foo:
return self
# error: [unsupported-operator]
# revealed: Unknown
reveal_type(Foo() + Foo())
Wrong type
TODO: check signature and error if other
is the wrong type