Support protocol checks for self-types in tuple types#21535
Merged
Conversation
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
JukkaL
approved these changes
May 22, 2026
Collaborator
JukkaL
left a comment
JukkaL
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, just one minor comment about a comment.
| if subtype.extra_attrs and subtype.extra_attrs.mod_name: | ||
| is_module = True | ||
| if not isinstance(original_subtype, TupleType): | ||
| # Only tuples are supported as implementing protocols for now. |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This comment was a bit confusing. It seemed imply that only a tuple type can be a subtype of a protocol. Reword?
Contributor
|
According to mypy_primer, this change doesn't affect type check results on a corpus of open source code. ✅ |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Fixes #21528
This fixes a regression caused by a typeshed PR exposing this missing feature. The implementation is somewhat non-trivial, but I don't see a simpler way to do it in a robust manner.