## Summary
This fixes several panics related to invalid assignment targets. All of
these led to some a crash, previously:
```py
(x.y := 1) # only name-expressions are valid targets of named expressions
([x, y] := [1, 2]) # same
(x, y): tuple[int, int] = (2, 3) # tuples are not valid targets for annotated assignments
(x, y) += 2 # tuples are not valid targets for augmented assignments
```
closes#14321closes#14322
## Test Plan
I symlinked four files from `crates/ruff_python_parser/resources` into
the red knot corpus, as they seemed like ideal test files for this exact
scenario. I think eventually, it might be a good idea to simply include *all*
invalid-syntax examples from the parser tests into red knots corpus (I believe
we're actually not too far from that goal). Or expand the scope of the corpus
test to this directory. Then we can get rid of these symlinks again.
## Summary
This avoids a panic inside `TypeInferenceBuilder::infer_type_parameters`
when encountering generic type aliases:
```py
type ListOrSet[T] = list[T] | set[T]
```
To fix this properly, we would have to treat type aliases as being their own
annotation scope [1]. The left hand side is a definition for the type parameter
`T` which is being used in the special annotation scope on the right hand side.
Similar to how it works for generic functions and classes.
[1] https://docs.python.org/3/reference/compound_stmts.html#generic-type-aliasescloses#14307
## Test Plan
Added new example to the corpus.
When we look up the types of class bases or keywords (`metaclass`), we
currently do this little dance: if there are type params, then look up
the type using `SemanticModel` in the type-params scope, if not, look up
the type directly in the definition's own scope, with support for
deferred types.
With inference of function parameter types, I'm now adding another case
of this same dance, so I'm motivated to make it a bit more ergonomic.
Add support to `definition_expression_ty` to handle any sub-expression
of a definition, whether it is in the definition's own scope or in a
type-params sub-scope.
Related to both #13693 and #14161.
## Summary
Use the memory address to uniquely identify AST nodes, instead of
relying on source range and kind. The latter fails for ASTs resulting
from invalid syntax examples. See #14313 for details.
Also results in a 1-2% speedup
(67349cf55f)
closes#14313
## Review
Here are the places where we use `NodeKey` directly or indirectly (via
`ExpressionNodeKey` or `DefinitionNodeKey`):
```rs
// semantic_index.rs
pub(crate) struct SemanticIndex<'db> {
// [...]
/// Map expressions to their corresponding scope.
scopes_by_expression: FxHashMap<ExpressionNodeKey, FileScopeId>,
/// Map from a node creating a definition to its definition.
definitions_by_node: FxHashMap<DefinitionNodeKey, Definition<'db>>,
/// Map from a standalone expression to its [`Expression`] ingredient.
expressions_by_node: FxHashMap<ExpressionNodeKey, Expression<'db>>,
// [...]
}
// semantic_index/builder.rs
pub(super) struct SemanticIndexBuilder<'db> {
// [...]
scopes_by_expression: FxHashMap<ExpressionNodeKey, FileScopeId>,
definitions_by_node: FxHashMap<ExpressionNodeKey, Definition<'db>>,
expressions_by_node: FxHashMap<ExpressionNodeKey, Expression<'db>>,
}
// semantic_index/ast_ids.rs
pub(crate) struct AstIds {
/// Maps expressions to their expression id.
expressions_map: FxHashMap<ExpressionNodeKey, ScopedExpressionId>,
/// Maps expressions which "use" a symbol (that is, [`ast::ExprName`]) to a use id.
uses_map: FxHashMap<ExpressionNodeKey, ScopedUseId>,
}
pub(super) struct AstIdsBuilder {
expressions_map: FxHashMap<ExpressionNodeKey, ScopedExpressionId>,
uses_map: FxHashMap<ExpressionNodeKey, ScopedUseId>,
}
```
## Test Plan
Added two failing examples to the corpus.
## Summary
Fixes a failing debug assertion that triggers for the following code:
```py
match some_int:
case x:=2:
pass
```
closes#14305
## Test Plan
Added problematic code example to corpus.
## Summary
- Emit diagnostics when looking up (possibly) unbound attributes
- More explicit test assertions for unbound symbols
- Review remaining call sites of `Symbol::ignore_possibly_unbound`. Most
of them are something like `builtins_symbol(self.db,
"Ellipsis").ignore_possibly_unbound().unwrap_or(Type::Unknown)` which
look okay to me, unless we want to emit additional diagnostics. There is
one additional case in enum literal handling, which has a TODO comment
anyway.
part of #14022
## Test Plan
New MD tests for (possibly) unbound attributes.
## Summary
This adds a new diagnostic when possibly unbound symbols are imported.
The `TODO` comment had a question mark, do I'm not sure if this is
really something that we want.
This does not touch the un*declared* case, yet.
relates to: #14022
## Test Plan
Updated already existing tests with new diagnostics
## Summary
Apart from one small functional change, this is mostly a refactoring of
the `Symbol` API:
- Rename `as_type` to the more explicit `ignore_possibly_unbound`, no
functional change
- Remove `unwrap_or_unknown` in favor of the more explicit
`.ignore_possibly_unbound().unwrap_or(Type::Unknown)`, no functional
change
- Consistently call it "possibly unbound" (not "may be unbound")
- Rename `replace_unbound_with` to `or_fall_back_to` and properly handle
boundness of the fall back. This is the only functional change (did not
have any impact on existing tests).
relates to: #14022
## Test Plan
New unit tests for `Symbol::or_fall_back_to`
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Create definitions and infer types for PEP 695 type variables.
This just gives us the type of the type variable itself (the type of `T`
as a runtime object in the body of `def f[T](): ...`), with special
handling for its attributes `__name__`, `__bound__`, `__constraints__`,
and `__default__`. Mostly the support for these attributes exists
because it is easy to implement and allows testing that we are
internally representing the typevar correctly.
This PR doesn't yet have support for interpreting a typevar as a type
annotation, which is of course the primary use of a typevar. But the
information we store in the typevar's type in this PR gives us
everything we need to handle it correctly in a future PR when the
typevar appears in an annotation.
## Test Plan
Added mdtest.
## Summary
`Ty::BuiltinClassLiteral(…)` is a sub~~class~~type of
`Ty::BuiltinInstance("type")`, so it can't be disjoint from it.
## Test Plan
New `is_not_disjoint_from` test case
## Summary
Fix `Type::is_assignable_to` for union types on the left hand side (of
`.is_assignable_to`; or the right hand side of the `… = …` assignment):
`Literal[1, 2]` should be assignable to `int`.
## Test Plan
New unit tests that were previously failing.
## Summary
Minor fix to `Type::is_subtype_of` to make sure that Boolean literals
are subtypes of `int`, to match runtime semantics.
Found this while doing some property-testing experiments [1].
[1] https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/14178
## Test Plan
New unit test.
## Summary
Fixes#14114. I don't think I can really describe the problems with our
current architecture (and therefore the motivations for this PR) any
better than @carljm did in that issue, so I'll just copy it out here!
---
We currently represent "known instances" (e.g. special forms like
`typing.Literal`, which are an instance of `typing._SpecialForm`, but
need to be handled differently from other instances of
`typing._SpecialForm`) as an `InstanceType` with a `known` field that is
`Some(...)`.
This makes it easy to handle a known instance as if it were a regular
instance type (by ignoring the `known` field), and in some cases (e.g.
`Type::member`) that is correct and convenient. But in other cases (e.g.
`Type::is_equivalent_to`) it is not correct, and we currently have a bug
that we would consider the known-instance type of `typing.Literal` as
equivalent to the general instance type for `typing._SpecialForm`, and
we would fail to consider it a singleton type or a single-valued type
(even though it is both.)
An instance type with `known.is_some()` is semantically quite different
from an instance type with `known.is_none()`. The former is a singleton
type that represents exactly one runtime object; the latter is an open
type that represents many runtime objects, including instances of
unknown subclasses. It is too error-prone to represent these
very-different types as a single `Type` variant. We should instead
introduce a dedicated `Type::KnownInstance` variant and force ourselves
to handle these explicitly in all `Type` variant matches.
## Possible followups
There is still a little bit of awkwardness in our current design in some
places, in that we first infer the symbol `typing.Literal` as a
`_SpecialForm` instance, and then later convert that instance-type into
a known-instance-type. We could also use this `KnownInstanceType` enum
to account for other special runtime symbols such as `builtins.Ellipsis`
or `builtins.NotImplemented`.
I think these might be worth pursuing, but I didn't do them here as they
didn't seem essential right now, and I wanted to keep the diff
relatively minimal.
## Test Plan
`cargo test -p red_knot_python_semantic`. New unit tests added for
`Type::is_subtype_of`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <carl@astral.sh>
## Summary
This adds type inference for comparison expressions involving
intersection types.
For example:
```py
x = get_random_int()
if x != 42:
reveal_type(x == 42) # revealed: Literal[False]
reveal_type(x == 43) # bool
```
closes#13854
## Test Plan
New Markdown-based tests.
---------
Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <carl@astral.sh>
## Summary
- Get rid of `Symbol::unwrap_or` (unclear semantics, not needed anymore)
- Introduce `Type::call_dunder`
- Emit new diagnostic for possibly-unbound `__iter__` methods
- Better diagnostics for callables with possibly-unbound /
possibly-non-callable `__call__` methods
part of: #14022closes#14016
## Test Plan
- Updated test for iterables with possibly-unbound `__iter__` methods.
- New tests for callables
## Summary
- Adds basic support for `type[C]` as a red knot `Type`. Some things
might not be supported yet, like `type[Any]`.
- Adds type narrowing for `issubclass` checks.
closes#14117
## Test Plan
New Markdown-based tests
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
I mirrored some of the idioms that @AlexWaygood used in the MRO work.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/14096.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Related to
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/13979#discussion_r1828305790,
this PR removes the `current_unpack` state field from
`SemanticIndexBuilder` and passes the `Unpack` ingredient via the
`CurrentAssignment` -> `DefinitionNodeRef` conversion to finally store
it on `DefintionNodeKind`.
This involves updating the lifetime of `AnyParameterRef` (parameter to
`declare_parameter`) to use the `'db` lifetime. Currently, all AST nodes
stored on various enums are marked with `'a` lifetime but they're always
utilized using the `'db` lifetime.
This also removes the dedicated `'a` lifetime parameter on
`add_definition` which is currently being used in `DefinitionNodeRef`.
As mentioned, all AST nodes live through the `'db` lifetime so we can
remove the `'a` lifetime parameter from that method and use the `'db`
lifetime instead.
## Summary
- Store the expression type for annotations that are starred expressions
(see [discussion
here](https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/pull/14091#discussion_r1828332857))
- Use `self.store_expression_type(…)` consistently throughout, as it
makes sure that no double-insertion errors occur.
closes#14115
## Test Plan
Added an invalid-syntax example to the corpus which leads to a panic on
`main`. Also added a Markdown test with a valid-syntax example that
would lead to a panic once we implement function parameter inference.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
Adds more precise type inference for `… is …` and `… is not …` identity
checks in some limited cases where we statically know the answer to be
either `Literal[True]` or `Literal[False]`.
I found this helpful while working on type inference for comparisons
involving intersection types, but I'm not sure if this is at all useful
for real world code (where the answer is most probably *not* statically
known). Note that we already have *type narrowing* for identity tests.
So while we are already able to generate constraints for things like `if
x is None`, we can now — in some limited cases — make an even stronger
conclusion and infer that the test expression itself is `Literal[False]`
(branch never taken) or `Literal[True]` (branch always taken).
## Test Plan
New Markdown tests
Handling `Literal` type in annotations.
Resolves: #13672
## Implementation
Since Literals are not a fully defined type in typeshed. I used a trick
to figure out when a special form is a literal.
When we are inferring assignment types I am checking if the type of that
assignment was resolved to typing.SpecialForm and the name of the target
is `Literal` if that is the case then I am re creating a new instance
type and set the known instance field to `KnownInstance:Literal`.
**Why not defining a new type?**
From this [issue](https://github.com/python/typeshed/issues/6219) I
learned that we want to resolve members to SpecialMethod class. So if we
create a new instance here we can rely on the member resolving in that
already exists.
## Tests
https://typing.readthedocs.io/en/latest/spec/literal.html#equivalence-of-two-literals
Since the type of the value inside Literal is evaluated as a
Literal(LiteralString, LiteralInt, ...) then the equality is only true
when types and value are equal.
https://typing.readthedocs.io/en/latest/spec/literal.html#legal-and-illegal-parameterizations
The illegal parameterizations are mostly implemented I'm currently
checking the slice expression and the slice type to make sure it's
valid.
https://typing.readthedocs.io/en/latest/spec/literal.html#shortening-unions-of-literals
---------
Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <carl@astral.sh>
Co-authored-by: Alex Waygood <Alex.Waygood@Gmail.com>
## Summary
This PR enables red-knot to support type narrowing based on `and` and
`or` conditionals, including nested combinations and their negation (for
`elif` / `else` blocks and for `not` operator). Part of #13694.
In order to address this properly (hopefully 😅), I had to run
`NarrowingConstraintsBuilder` functions recursively. In the first commit
I introduced a minor refactor - instead of mutating `self.constraints`,
the new constraints are now returned as function return values. I also
modified the constraints map to be optional, preventing unnecessary
hashmap allocations.
Thanks @carljm for your support on this :)
The second commit contains the logic and tests for handling boolean ops,
with improvements to intersections handling in `is_subtype_of` .
As I'm still new to Rust and the internals of type checkers, I’d be more
than happy to hear any insights or suggestions.
Thank you!
---------
Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <carl@astral.sh>
## Summary
Encountered this while running red-knot benchmarks on the `black`
codebase.
Fixes two of the issues in #13478.
## Test Plan
Added a regression test.
## Summary
Removes `Type::None` in favor of `KnownClass::NoneType.to_instance(…)`.
closes#13670
## Performance
There is a -4% performance regression on our red-knot benchmark. This is due to the fact that we now have to import `_typeshed` as a module, and infer types.
## Test Plan
Existing tests pass.
