[ty] Handle annotated self parameter in constructor of non-invariant generic classes (#21325)

This manifested as an error when inferring the type of a PEP-695 generic
class via its constructor parameters:

```py
class D[T, U]:
    @overload
    def __init__(self: "D[str, U]", u: U) -> None: ...
    @overload
    def __init__(self, t: T, u: U) -> None: ...
    def __init__(self, *args) -> None: ...

# revealed: D[Unknown, str]
# SHOULD BE: D[str, str]
reveal_type(D("string"))
```

This manifested because `D` is inferred to be bivariant in both `T` and
`U`. We weren't seeing this in the equivalent example for legacy
typevars, since those default to invariant. (This issue also showed up
for _covariant_ typevars, so this issue was not limited to bivariance.)

The underlying cause was because of a heuristic that we have in our
current constraint solver, which attempts to handle situations like
this:

```py
def f[T](t: T | None): ...
f(None)
```

Here, the `None` argument matches the non-typevar union element, so this
argument should not add any constraints on what `T` can specialize to.
Our previous heuristic would check for this by seeing if the argument
type is a subtype of the parameter annotation as a whole — even if it
isn't a union! That would cause us to erroneously ignore the `self`
parameter in our constructor call, since bivariant classes are
equivalent to each other, regardless of their specializations.

The quick fix is to move this heuristic "down a level", so that we only
apply it when the parameter annotation is a union. This heuristic should
go away completely 🤞 with the new constraint solver.

crates/ty_python_semantic/resources/mdtest/assignment/annotations.md

@@ -674,8 +674,7 @@ x6: Covariant[Any] = covariant(1)
 x7: Contravariant[Any] = contravariant(1)
 x8: Invariant[Any] = invariant(1)
 
-# TODO: This could reveal `Bivariant[Any]`.
+reveal_type(x5)  # revealed: Bivariant[Any]
-reveal_type(x5)  # revealed: Bivariant[Literal[1]]
 reveal_type(x6)  # revealed: Covariant[Any]
 reveal_type(x7)  # revealed: Contravariant[Any]
 reveal_type(x8)  # revealed: Invariant[Any]

crates/ty_python_semantic/resources/mdtest/generics/legacy/classes.md

@@ -436,9 +436,7 @@ def test_seq(x: Sequence[T]) -> Sequence[T]:
 def func8(t1: tuple[complex, list[int]], t2: tuple[int, *tuple[str, ...]], t3: tuple[()]):
     reveal_type(test_seq(t1))  # revealed: Sequence[int | float | complex | list[int]]
     reveal_type(test_seq(t2))  # revealed: Sequence[int | str]
-
+    reveal_type(test_seq(t3))  # revealed: Sequence[Never]
-    # TODO: this should be `Sequence[Never]`
-    reveal_type(test_seq(t3))  # revealed: Sequence[Unknown]
 ```
 
 ### `__init__` is itself generic
@@ -466,6 +464,7 @@ wrong_innards: C[int] = C("five", 1)
 from typing_extensions import overload, Generic, TypeVar
 
 T = TypeVar("T")
+U = TypeVar("U")
 
 class C(Generic[T]):
     @overload
@@ -497,6 +496,17 @@ C[int](12)
 C[None]("string")  # error: [no-matching-overload]
 C[None](b"bytes")  # error: [no-matching-overload]
 C[None](12)
+
+class D(Generic[T, U]):
+    @overload
+    def __init__(self: "D[str, U]", u: U) -> None: ...
+    @overload
+    def __init__(self, t: T, u: U) -> None: ...
+    def __init__(self, *args) -> None: ...
+
+reveal_type(D("string"))  # revealed: D[str, str]
+reveal_type(D(1))  # revealed: D[str, int]
+reveal_type(D(1, "string"))  # revealed: D[int, str]
 ```
 
 ### Synthesized methods with dataclasses

crates/ty_python_semantic/resources/mdtest/generics/pep695/classes.md

@@ -375,9 +375,7 @@ def test_seq[T](x: Sequence[T]) -> Sequence[T]:
 def func8(t1: tuple[complex, list[int]], t2: tuple[int, *tuple[str, ...]], t3: tuple[()]):
     reveal_type(test_seq(t1))  # revealed: Sequence[int | float | complex | list[int]]
     reveal_type(test_seq(t2))  # revealed: Sequence[int | str]
-
+    reveal_type(test_seq(t3))  # revealed: Sequence[Never]
-    # TODO: this should be `Sequence[Never]`
-    reveal_type(test_seq(t3))  # revealed: Sequence[Unknown]
 ```
 
 ### `__init__` is itself generic
@@ -436,6 +434,17 @@ C[int](12)
 C[None]("string")  # error: [no-matching-overload]
 C[None](b"bytes")  # error: [no-matching-overload]
 C[None](12)
+
+class D[T, U]:
+    @overload
+    def __init__(self: "D[str, U]", u: U) -> None: ...
+    @overload
+    def __init__(self, t: T, u: U) -> None: ...
+    def __init__(self, *args) -> None: ...
+
+reveal_type(D("string"))  # revealed: D[str, str]
+reveal_type(D(1))  # revealed: D[str, int]
+reveal_type(D(1, "string"))  # revealed: D[int, str]
 ```
 
 ### Synthesized methods with dataclasses

crates/ty_python_semantic/src/types/generics.rs

@@ -1393,31 +1393,6 @@ impl<'db> SpecializationBuilder<'db> {
             return Ok(());
         }
 
-        // If the actual type is a subtype of the formal type, then return without adding any new
-        // type mappings. (Note that if the formal type contains any typevars, this check will
-        // fail, since no non-typevar types are assignable to a typevar. Also note that we are
-        // checking _subtyping_, not _assignability_, so that we do specialize typevars to dynamic
-        // argument types; and we have a special case for `Never`, which is a subtype of all types,
-        // but which we also do want as a specialization candidate.)
-        //
-        // In particular, this handles a case like
-        //
-        // ```py
-        // def f[T](t: T | None): ...
-        //
-        // f(None)
-        // ```
-        //
-        // without specializing `T` to `None`.
-        if !matches!(formal, Type::ProtocolInstance(_))
-            && !actual.is_never()
-            && actual
-                .when_subtype_of(self.db, formal, self.inferable)
-                .is_always_satisfied(self.db)
-        {
-            return Ok(());
-        }
-
         // Remove the union elements from `actual` that are not related to `formal`, and vice
         // versa.
         //
@@ -1473,10 +1448,30 @@ impl<'db> SpecializationBuilder<'db> {
                 self.add_type_mapping(*formal_bound_typevar, remaining_actual, filter);
             }
             (Type::Union(formal), _) => {
-                // Second, if the formal is a union, and precisely one union element _is_ a typevar (not
+                // Second, if the formal is a union, and precisely one union element is assignable
-                // _contains_ a typevar), then we add a mapping between that typevar and the actual
+                // from the actual type, then we don't add any type mapping. This handles a case like
-                // type. (Note that we've already handled above the case where the actual is
+                //
-                // assignable to any _non-typevar_ union element.)
+                // ```py
+                // def f[T](t: T | None): ...
+                //
+                // f(None)
+                // ```
+                //
+                // without specializing `T` to `None`.
+                //
+                // Otherwise, if precisely one union element _is_ a typevar (not _contains_ a
+                // typevar), then we add a mapping between that typevar and the actual type.
+                if !actual.is_never() {
+                    let assignable_elements = (formal.elements(self.db).iter()).filter(|ty| {
+                        actual
+                            .when_subtype_of(self.db, **ty, self.inferable)
+                            .is_always_satisfied(self.db)
+                    });
+                    if assignable_elements.exactly_one().is_ok() {
+                        return Ok(());
+                    }
+                }
+
                 let bound_typevars =
                     (formal.elements(self.db).iter()).filter_map(|ty| ty.as_typevar());
                 if let Ok(bound_typevar) = bound_typevars.exactly_one() {