-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3k
Do not cache fast container types inside lambdas #20166
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
Merged
hauntsaninja
merged 1 commit into
python:master
from
sterliakov:bugfix/gh-20163-fast-container-lambda
Nov 3, 2025
+22
−2
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Isn't there an expr cache that stores errors too? Is it possible to use that instead?
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.
We already explicitly bypass the expr cache for lambdas, so probably no?
mypy/mypy/checkexpr.py
Lines 6035 to 6050 in 843d133
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
That makes some sense, but I don't quite get the comment there. I also don't get why this extra cache exists...
I guess the comment is saying "the same expr can be evaluated multiple times in different contexts" which makes a bit of sense?
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 also do not fully understand why a separate
resolved_typestorage is needed at all. It might well be just a remainder that wasn't cleaned up whenexpr_cachewas introduced, but I'm not certain.This lambda special-casing is coming from in #19408 and #19505, we discovered it independently.
lambdaexprs are handled in a completely different way with and without type context (seeinfer_lambda_type_using_contextand branching on its result). There's a big difference between accepting aReturnStmtand its expression alone - supporting both ways essentially means that we use different context stack entries on different paths for the same expression. This part is a bit difficult to reason about, but I still hope I got it correctly...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.
OK, I guess it would make sense to try removing
resolved_typecache in a followup...