Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix crash with forward reference in TypedDict #3560

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 21, 2017
Merged

Conversation

JukkaL
Copy link
Collaborator

@JukkaL JukkaL commented Jun 16, 2017

Move join to happen after semantic analysis to avoid crash due to
incomplete MRO in TypeInfo. The implementation uses a new semantic
analysis 'fixup' phase.

Fixes #3319. Fixes #2489. Fixes #3316.

Move join to happen after semantic analysis to avoid crash due to
incomplete MRO in TypeInfo. The implementation uses a new semantic
analysis 'fixup' phase.

Fixes #3319.
@@ -813,3 +813,29 @@ p = TaggedPoint(type='2d', x=42, y=1337)
p.get('x', 1 + 'y') # E: Unsupported operand types for + ("int" and "str")
[builtins fixtures/dict.pyi]
[typing fixtures/typing-full.pyi]


-- Special cases
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just have few comments:

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good comments! My responses:

  • This seems to remove the only remaining join during semantic analysis. Updated fixed issues in PR description.
  • Added Use join to calculate better fallback for tuples #3575 about using join with tuples. This seems to affect ordinary tuples as well, not just named tuples.
  • I'll add a test case using the class syntax.

Copy link
Member

@gvanrossum gvanrossum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The two comments are optional, but I wonder if you could use a different term than "fixup" since that's also used for post-deserialization fixup (e.g. fixup.py, used by build.py).

@@ -2366,11 +2374,19 @@ def fail_typeddict_arg(self, message: str,

def build_typeddict_typeinfo(self, name: str, items: List[str],
types: List[Type]) -> TypeInfo:
mapping_value_type = join.join_type_list(types)
fallback = (self.named_type_or_none('typing.Mapping',
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just curious whether it would ever make a difference whether this was MutableMapping?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Probably the most precise fallback would be just Dict, but probably we want to have some flexibility because Mapping is covariant in value type (unlike MutableMapping and Dict that are invariant).

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hm, now you mention variance, why shouldn't this be invariant?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My previous comment was just my interpretation of the status quo. As far as I am concerned, I would prefer fallback to be just Dict (this would be most precise and most similar to how tuples and named tuples work).

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The reason why we don't use a mutable type as a fallback is that it would compromise type safety. For example, if the fallback would be Dict[str, (join of value types)], then for {'a': 1, 'b': 'x'} the fallback type would be Dict[str, object]. Through the fallback type we could do things like del d['a'] or d['a'] = [1] which would break safety. Mapping only supports getting values, so it's safe. Also, since Mapping only provides read operations, it can be covariant in the value type.

Making a typed dict compatible with Dict[str, Any] without making this the fallback might be a reasonable thing to do, but it's unclear if that would result in ambiguity or other problems.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe I am missing something, but TypedDict is special-cased in cheker.check_indexed_assignment, however del d['a'] indeed goes through just checking for __delitem__ and the latter is looked up on the fallback. Maybe we can just special-case this too? TypedDicts at runtime are just dicts and have methods like update that can't be accessed on Mapping. Also TypedDict with total=False can support item deletion.

Anyway, it looks like both Mapping and Dict fallbacks require some special-casing, and it is not something where I have a strong opinion.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, we could special case additional methods, but it wouldn't still be safe: a TypedDict is a subtype of the fallback type, and if the fallback type is Dict, we could upcast a TypedDict to the Dicttype and do things that the TypedDict wouldn't support, such as setting items with incompatible value types, or deleting required keys.

mypy/semanal.py Outdated
or self.object_type())

def fixup() -> None:
mapping_value_type = join.join_type_list(types)
fallback.args[1] = mapping_value_type
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't see much value in introducing an extra local variable here.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I can replace it with a comment.

@gvanrossum gvanrossum merged commit 94b4cfd into master Jun 21, 2017
@gvanrossum gvanrossum deleted the typeddict-crash branch June 21, 2017 16:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
3 participants