## Summary
Closes: https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/551
This PR adds support for step 4 of the overload call evaluation
algorithm which states that:
> If the argument list is compatible with two or more overloads,
determine whether one or more of the overloads has a variadic parameter
(either `*args` or `**kwargs`) that maps to a corresponding argument
that supplies an indeterminate number of positional or keyword
arguments. If so, eliminate overloads that do not have a variadic
parameter.
And, with that, the overload call evaluation algorithm has been
implemented completely end to end as stated in the typing spec.
## Test Plan
Expand the overload call test suite.
## Summary
Closes: https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/1236
This PR fixes a bug where the variadic argument wouldn't match against
the variadic parameter in certain scenarios.
This was happening because I didn't realize that the `all_elements`
iterator wouldn't keep on returning the variable element (which is
correct, I just didn't realize it back then).
I don't think we can use the `resize` method here because we don't know
how many parameters this variadic argument is matching against as this
is where the actual parameter matching occurs.
## Test Plan
Expand test cases to consider a few more combinations of arguments and
parameters which are variadic.
## Summary
This PR adds support for unpacking `**kwargs` argument.
This can be matched against any standard (positional or keyword),
keyword-only, or keyword variadic parameter that haven't been matched
yet.
This PR also takes care of special casing `TypedDict` because the key
names and the corresponding value type is known, so we can be more
precise in our matching and type checking step. In the future, this
special casing would be extended to include `ParamSpec` as well.
Part of astral-sh/ty#247
## Test Plan
Add test cases for various scenarios.
## Summary
This PR addresses an issue for a variadic argument when involved in
argument type expansion of overload call evaluation.
The issue is that the expansion of the variadic argument could result in
argument list of different arity. For example, in `*args: tuple[int] |
tuple[int, str]`, the expansion would lead to the variadic argument
being unpacked into 1 and 2 element respectively. This means that the
parameter matching that was performed initially isn't sufficient and
each expanded argument list would need to redo the parameter matching
again.
This is currently done by redoing the parameter matching directly,
maintaining the state of argument forms (and the conflicting forms), and
updating the `Bindings` values if it changes.
Closes: astral-sh/ty#735
## Test Plan
Update existing mdtest.
## Summary
- Add support for the return types of `async` functions
- Add type inference for `await` expressions
- Add support for `async with` / async context managers
- Add support for `yield from` expressions
This PR is generally lacking proper error handling in some cases (e.g.
illegal `__await__` attributes). I'm planning to work on this in a
follow-up.
part of https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/151
closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/736
## Ecosystem
There are a lot of true positives on `prefect` which look similar to:
```diff
prefect (https://github.com/PrefectHQ/prefect)
+ src/integrations/prefect-aws/tests/workers/test_ecs_worker.py:406:12: error[unresolved-attribute] Type `str` has no attribute `status_code`
```
This is due to a wrong return type annotation
[here](e926b8c4c1/src/integrations/prefect-aws/tests/workers/test_ecs_worker.py (L355-L391)).
```diff
mitmproxy (https://github.com/mitmproxy/mitmproxy)
+ test/mitmproxy/addons/test_clientplayback.py:18:1: error[invalid-argument-type] Argument to function `asynccontextmanager` is incorrect: Expected `(...) -> AsyncIterator[Unknown]`, found `def tcp_server(handle_conn, **server_args) -> Unknown | tuple[str, int]`
```
[This](a4d794c59a/test/mitmproxy/addons/test_clientplayback.py (L18-L19))
is a true positive. That function should return
`AsyncIterator[Address]`, not `Address`.
I looked through almost all of the other new diagnostics and they all
look like known problems or true positives.
## Typing conformance
The typing conformance diff looks good.
## Test Plan
New Markdown tests
This PR updates our iterator protocol machinery to return a tuple spec
describing the elements that are returned, instead of a type. That
allows us to track heterogeneous iterators more precisely, and
consolidates the logic in unpacking and splatting, which are the two
places where we can take advantage of that more precise information.
(Other iterator consumers, like `for` loops, have to collapse the
iterated elements down to a single type regardless, and we provide a new
helper method on `TupleSpec` to perform that summarization.)
This PR updates our call binding logic to handle splatted arguments.
Complicating matters is that we have separated call bind analysis into
two phases: parameter matching and type checking. Parameter matching
looks at the arity of the function signature and call site, and assigns
arguments to parameters. Importantly, we don't yet know the type of each
argument! This is needed so that we can decide whether to infer the type
of each argument as a type form or value form, depending on the
requirements of the parameter that the argument was matched to.
This is an issue when splatting an argument, since we need to know how
many elements the splatted argument contains to know how many positional
parameters to match it against. And to know how many elements the
splatted argument has, we need to know its type.
To get around this, we now make the assumption that splatted arguments
can only be used with value-form parameters. (If you end up splatting an
argument into a type-form parameter, we will silently pass in its
value-form type instead.) That allows us to preemptively infer the
(value-form) type of any splatted argument, so that we have its arity
available during parameter matching. We defer inference of non-splatted
arguments until after parameter matching has finished, as before.
We reuse a lot of the new tuple machinery to make this happen — in
particular resizing the tuple spec representing the number of arguments
passed in with the tuple length representing the number of parameters
the splat was matched with.
This work also shows that we might need to change how we are performing
argument expansion during overload resolution. At the moment, when we
expand parameters, we assume that each argument will still be matched to
the same parameters as before, and only retry the type-checking phase.
With splatted arguments, this is no longer the case, since the inferred
arity of each union element might be different than the arity of the
union as a whole, which can affect how many parameters the splatted
argument is matched to. See the regression test case in
`mdtest/call/function.md` for more details.
## Summary
Having a recursive type method to check whether a type is fully static
is inefficient, unnecessary, and makes us overly strict about subtyping
relations.
It's inefficient because we end up re-walking the same types many times
to check for fully-static-ness.
It's unnecessary because we can check relations involving the dynamic
type appropriately, depending whether the relation is subtyping or
assignability.
We use the subtyping relation to simplify unions and intersections. We
can usefully consider that `S <: T` for gradual types also, as long as
it remains true that `S | T` is equivalent to `T` and `S & T` is
equivalent to `S`.
One conservative definition (implemented here) that satisfies this
requirement is that we consider `S <: T` if, for every possible pair of
materializations `S'` and `T'`, `S' <: T'`. Or put differently the top
materialization of `S` (`S+` -- the union of all possible
materializations of `S`) is a subtype of the bottom materialization of
`T` (`T-` -- the intersection of all possible materializations of `T`).
In the most basic cases we can usefully say that `Any <: object` and
that `Never <: Any`, and we can handle more complex cases inductively
from there.
This definition of subtyping for gradual subtypes is not reflexive
(`Any` is not a subtype of `Any`).
As a corollary, we also remove `is_gradual_equivalent_to` --
`is_equivalent_to` now has the meaning that `is_gradual_equivalent_to`
used to have. If necessary, we could restore an
`is_fully_static_equivalent_to` or similar (which would not do an
`is_fully_static` pre-check of the types, but would instead pass a
relation-kind enum down through a recursive equivalence check, similar
to `has_relation_to`), but so far this doesn't appear to be necessary.
Credit to @JelleZijlstra for the observation that `is_fully_static` is
unnecessary and overly restrictive on subtyping.
There is another possible definition of gradual subtyping: instead of
requiring that `S+ <: T-`, we could instead require that `S+ <: T+` and
`S- <: T-`. In other words, instead of requiring all materializations of
`S` to be a subtype of every materialization of `T`, we just require
that every materialization of `S` be a subtype of _some_ materialization
of `T`, and that every materialization of `T` be a supertype of some
materialization of `S`. This definition also preserves the core
invariant that `S <: T` implies that `S | T = T` and `S & T = S`, and it
restores reflexivity: under this definition, `Any` is a subtype of
`Any`, and for any equivalent types `S` and `T`, `S <: T` and `T <: S`.
But unfortunately, this definition breaks transitivity of subtyping,
because nominal subclasses in Python use assignability ("consistent
subtyping") to define acceptable overrides. This means that we may have
a class `A` with `def method(self) -> Any` and a subtype `B(A)` with
`def method(self) -> int`, since `int` is assignable to `Any`. This
means that if we have a protocol `P` with `def method(self) -> Any`, we
would have `B <: A` (from nominal subtyping) and `A <: P` (`Any` is a
subtype of `Any`), but not `B <: P` (`int` is not a subtype of `Any`).
Breaking transitivity of subtyping is not tenable, so we don't use this
definition of subtyping.
## Test Plan
Existing tests (modified in some cases to account for updated
semantics.)
Stable property tests pass at a million iterations:
`QUICKCHECK_TESTS=1000000 cargo test -p ty_python_semantic -- --ignored
types::property_tests::stable`
### Changes to property test type generation
Since we no longer have a method of categorizing built types as
fully-static or not-fully-static, I had to add a previously-discussed
feature to the property tests so that some tests can build types that
are known by construction to be fully static, because there are still
properties that only apply to fully-static types (for example,
reflexiveness of subtyping.)
## Changes to handling of `*args, **kwargs` signatures
This PR "discovered" that, once we allow non-fully-static types to
participate in subtyping under the above definitions, `(*args: Any,
**kwargs: Any) -> Any` is now a subtype of `() -> object`. This is true,
if we take a literal interpretation of the former signature: all
materializations of the parameters `*args: Any, **kwargs: Any` can
accept zero arguments, making the former signature a subtype of the
latter. But the spec actually says that `*args: Any, **kwargs: Any`
should be interpreted as equivalent to `...`, and that makes a
difference here: `(...) -> Any` is not a subtype of `() -> object`,
because (unlike a literal reading of `(*args: Any, **kwargs: Any)`),
`...` can materialize to _any_ signature, including a signature with
required positional arguments.
This matters for this PR because it makes the "any two types are both
assignable to their union" property test fail if we don't implement the
equivalence to `...`. Because `FunctionType.__call__` has the signature
`(*args: Any, **kwargs: Any) -> Any`, and if we take that at face value
it's a subtype of `() -> object`, making `FunctionType` a subtype of `()
-> object)` -- but then a function with a required argument is also a
subtype of `FunctionType`, but not a subtype of `() -> object`. So I
went ahead and implemented the equivalence to `...` in this PR.
## Ecosystem analysis
* Most of the ecosystem report are cases of improved union/intersection
simplification. For example, we can now simplify a union like `bool |
(bool & Unknown) | Unknown` to simply `bool | Unknown`, because we can
now observe that every possible materialization of `bool & Unknown` is
still a subtype of `bool` (whereas before we would set aside `bool &
Unknown` as a not-fully-static type.) This is clearly an improvement.
* The `possibly-unresolved-reference` errors in sockeye, pymongo,
ignite, scrapy and others are true positives for conditional imports
that were formerly silenced by bogus conflicting-declarations (which we
currently don't issue a diagnostic for), because we considered two
different declarations of `Unknown` to be conflicting (we used
`is_equivalent_to` not `is_gradual_equivalent_to`). In this PR that
distinction disappears and all equivalence is gradual, so a declaration
of `Unknown` no longer conflicts with a declaration of `Unknown`, which
then results in us surfacing the possibly-unbound error.
* We will now issue "redundant cast" for casting from a typevar with a
gradual bound to the same typevar (the hydra-zen diagnostic). This seems
like an improvement.
* The new diagnostics in bandersnatch are interesting. For some reason
primer in CI seems to be checking bandersnatch on Python 3.10 (not yet
sure why; this doesn't happen when I run it locally). But bandersnatch
uses `enum.StrEnum`, which doesn't exist on 3.10. That makes the `class
SimpleDigest(StrEnum)` a class that inherits from `Unknown` (and
bypasses our current TODO handling for accessing attributes on enum
classes, since we don't recognize it as an enum class at all). This PR
improves our understanding of assignability to classes that inherit from
`Any` / `Unknown`, and we now recognize that a string literal is not
assignable to a class inheriting `Any` or `Unknown`.
