-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31.1k
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
bpo-43224: Add tests for TypeVarTuple substitution in Annotated #31846
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks! The tests are good but it's a bit unfortunate if we can't use Annotated around a TypeVarTuple at all.
@@ -2046,6 +2057,9 @@ def __class_getitem__(cls, params): | |||
raise TypeError("Annotated[...] should be used " | |||
"with at least two arguments (a type and an " | |||
"annotation).") | |||
if _is_unpacked_typevartuple(params[0]): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think we need to explicitly disallow this at runtime.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, but then how should we handle situations like this?
A = Annotated[Unpack[Ts], "foo"]
B = A[int, str]
Annotated[int, str, "foo"]
wouldn't be valid. We could do some kind of automatic tuple wrapping, Annotated[tuple[int, str], "foo"
, but that would be inconsistent with how we handle TypeVarTuple
substitution elsewhere.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good point, and sorry for not responding to this earlier.
At some point I guess we should add tests for the native
tuple
too, once #31828 or similar is in.@JelleZijlstra Does this assuage the concerns you mentioned about
Annotated
in #31021 (review)?@@GBeauregard too, since Jelle also mentioned you in that thread - is there anything else we should test for here?
https://bugs.python.org/issue43224