Don't treat functions with reversible dunder names as such #5421
Conversation
Previously, functions that had the same name as a reversible dunder method (for example, __rpow__) were checked as if they were such a method. This could lead to crashes and false positives. Closes: python#5419
mypy/messages.py
Outdated
| @@ -997,6 +997,7 @@ def overloaded_signatures_ret_specific(self, index: int, context: Context) -> No | |||
| def operator_method_signatures_overlap( | |||
| self, reverse_class: TypeInfo, reverse_method: str, forward_class: Type, | |||
| forward_method: str, context: Context) -> None: | |||
| assert reverse_class is not None | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can remove this assert -- we already do a check and an assert up above. It'll also be more consistent this way: we don't really perform checks like these in other similar message methods.
(In fact, it actually ought to be impossible for reverse_class to be None at this point since we type-check mypy itself under strict-optional mode: the fact that it sometimes could be is an unfortunate consequence of this cast. I'd rather we eventually fix that TODO so we don't have to keep adding asserts -- but that's definitely very much out-of-scope for this PR.)
test-data/unit/check-modules.test
Outdated
| @@ -2495,3 +2495,6 @@ def __getattr__(attr: str) -> Any: ... | |||
| class Cls: ... | |||
| [builtins fixtures/module.pyi] | |||
| [out] | |||
|
|
|||
| [case testFunctionWithReversibleDunderName] | |||
| def __rpow__(self) -> int: ... | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
While we're at it, maybe leave a test case checking to see what happens if we make this function an overload? And what happens if we define a top-level in-place operator method (like __iadd__)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good idea. I will add tests for __add__, __radd__, and __iadd__, so we have covered all three cases.
|
Thanks! |
Previously, functions that had the same name as a reversible dunder method (for example,
__rpow__) were checked as if they were such a method. This could lead to crashes and false positives.Closes: #5419