-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.8k
Add type signatures to lru_cache
using overloads (not ready to merge)
#13033
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
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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 think combine these and use
Concatenate
instead, avoid needing to explicitly name a parameter, partially fix issue mentioned by @DaverballThere 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 think that's pretty much what the closest to working earlier approach did, yes. But it still had its edge cases where it didn't work unfortunately. Maybe things are a little bit more forgiving now.
If I'm not mistaken what you're doing in addition to earlier approaches is to always accept both signatures for methods/classmethods (i.e. the one where you have to explicitly provide
self
/cls
and the one where you don't), so you give up some type safety oninstance.method()
vs.Cls.method()
since it would not be able to detect that you're missing a required parameter.That might be a reasonable trade-off for the overall better type safety, although I fear that language servers will not know what to do with these overloads, so instead of no parameter hints you may get confusing/difficult to read hints, which could be seen as a regression in ergonomics.