Accurate return types for ZipFile.open() and zipfile.Path.open()
#13069
Conversation
This file contains 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
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Sorry for the late reply. I've noticed that there are unnecessary version_info branches both in |
|
Diff from mypy_primer, showing the effect of this PR on open source code: static-frame (https://github.com/static-frame/static-frame)
+ static_frame/core/archive_npy.py:349: error: Argument 1 to "to_npy" of "NPYConverter" has incompatible type "_ZipWriteFile | IO[bytes]"; expected "IO[bytes]" [arg-type]
+ static_frame/core/archive_npy.py:356: error: Argument 1 to "from_npy" of "NPYConverter" has incompatible type "ZipExtFile | IO[bytes]"; expected "IO[bytes]" [arg-type]
+ static_frame/core/archive_npy.py:367: error: Argument 1 to "header_from_npy" of "NPYConverter" has incompatible type "ZipExtFile | IO[bytes]"; expected "IO[bytes]" [arg-type]
+ static_frame/core/archive_npy.py:552: error: Argument 1 to "to_npy" of "NPYConverter" has incompatible type "_ZipWriteFile"; expected "IO[bytes]" [arg-type]
+ static_frame/core/archive_npy.py:560: error: Argument 1 to "from_npy" of "NPYConverter" has incompatible type "ZipExtFile"; expected "IO[bytes]" [arg-type]
+ static_frame/core/archive_npy.py:572: error: Argument 1 to "header_from_npy" of "NPYConverter" has incompatible type "ZipExtFile"; expected "IO[bytes]" [arg-type]
|
srittau
requested changes
Mar 11, 2025
Comment on lines
+237
to
+239
| @overload | ||
| def open( | ||
| self, name: str | ZipInfo, mode: Literal["w"] = ..., pwd: bytes | None = None, *, force_zip64: bool = False |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This would imply that this overload would also apply if no mode argument is given, which obviously isn't true. Also, since pwd is only allowed when reading files:
Suggested change
| @overload | |
| def open( | |
| self, name: str | ZipInfo, mode: Literal["w"] = ..., pwd: bytes | None = None, *, force_zip64: bool = False | |
| @overload | |
| def open( | |
| self, name: str | ZipInfo, mode: Literal["w"], pwd: None = None, *, force_zip64: bool = False |
Comment on lines
+241
to
244
| @overload | ||
| def open( | ||
| self, name: str | ZipInfo, mode: _ReadWriteMode = "r", pwd: bytes | None = None, *, force_zip64: bool = False | ||
| self, name: str | ZipInfo, mode: _ReadWriteMode, pwd: bytes | None = None, *, force_zip64: bool = False | ||
| ) -> IO[bytes]: ... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suggest to leave out this "fallback" overload. If this causes too much trouble, mypy_primer in our CI should warn us.
Comment on lines
+360
to
+361
| @overload | ||
| def open(self, mode: _ReadWriteMode, pwd: bytes | None = None, *, force_zip64: bool = False) -> IO[bytes]: ... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
See above: I would skip this overload.
Comment on lines
+358
to
+359
| @overload | ||
| def open(self, mode: Literal["w"] = ..., pwd: bytes | None = None, *, force_zip64: bool = False) -> _ZipWriteFile: ... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As above:
Suggested change
| @overload | |
| def open(self, mode: Literal["w"] = ..., pwd: bytes | None = None, *, force_zip64: bool = False) -> _ZipWriteFile: ... | |
| @overload | |
| def open(self, mode: Literal["w"], pwd: None = None, *, force_zip64: bool = False) -> _ZipWriteFile: ... |
| def open(self, mode: Literal["rb", "wb"], *, pwd: bytes | None = None) -> IO[bytes]: ... | ||
| def open(self, mode: Literal["rb"], *, pwd: bytes | None = None) -> ZipExtFile: ... | ||
| @overload | ||
| def open(self, mode: Literal["wb"], *, pwd: bytes | None = None) -> _ZipWriteFile: ... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As above:
Suggested change
| def open(self, mode: Literal["wb"], *, pwd: bytes | None = None) -> _ZipWriteFile: ... | |
| def open(self, mode: Literal["wb"], *, pwd: None = None) -> _ZipWriteFile: ... |
| def open(self, mode: Literal["rb", "wb"], *, pwd: bytes | None = None) -> IO[bytes]: ... | ||
| def open(self, mode: Literal["rb"], *, pwd: bytes | None = None) -> ZipExtFile: ... | ||
| @overload | ||
| def open(self, mode: Literal["wb"], *, pwd: bytes | None = None) -> _ZipWriteFile: ... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| def open(self, mode: Literal["wb"], *, pwd: bytes | None = None) -> _ZipWriteFile: ... | |
| def open(self, mode: Literal["wb"], *, pwd: None = None) -> _ZipWriteFile: ... |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
An attempt to close #13051. Initially I used
SizedBufferfordatain_ZipWriteFile.write()but this resulted in LSP violations.For Python 3.8
_ReadWriteBinaryModeis replaced by_ReadWriteModeinzipfile.Path.open()because it did not yet accept modesrbandwb.If I understand correctly, tests are failing because
zipfile.Path.open(mode="rb")which now returnsZipExtFiledoes not comply anymore withimportlib.abc.Traversable.open(mode="rb")which returnsIO[bytes]and I'm not sure how this should be addressed.