gh-132493: Remove __annotations__ usage in inspect._signature_is_functionlike #133415
Conversation
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
<
8000
div class="AvatarStack-body" >
…s_functionlike This check is potentially problematic because it could force evaluation of annotations unnecessarily. This doesn't trigger for builtin objects (functions, classes, or modules) with annotations, but it could trigger for third-party objects. The check was not particularly useful anyway, because it succeeds if ``__annotations__`` is a dict or None, so the only thing this did was guard against objects that have an ``__annotations__`` attribute that is of some other type. That doesn't seem particularly useful, so I just removed the check.
serhiy-storchaka
approved these changes
May 9, 2025
|
Thanks! I am planning to backport this since it's better to get the annotation changes all at once in 3.14, and removing unnecessary evaluation of annotations feels like a bugfix. |
|
Thanks @JelleZijlstra for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.14. |
miss-islington
pushed a commit
to miss-islington/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
May 10, 2025
…s_functionlike (pythonGH-133415) This check is potentially problematic because it could force evaluation of annotations unnecessarily. This doesn't trigger for builtin objects (functions, classes, or modules) with annotations, but it could trigger for third-party objects. The check was not particularly useful anyway, because it succeeds if ``__annotations__`` is a dict or None, so the only thing this did was guard against objects that have an ``__annotations__`` attribute that is of some other type. That doesn't seem particularly useful, so I just removed the check. (cherry picked from commit cb6596c) Co-authored-by: Jelle Zijlstra <jelle.zijlstra@gmail.com>
|
GH-133796 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.14 branch. |
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.
This check is potentially problematic because it could force evaluation of
annotations unnecessarily. This doesn't trigger for builtin objects (functions,
classes, or modules) with annotations, but it could trigger for third-party objects.
The check was not particularly useful anyway, because it succeeds if
__annotations__is a dict or None, so the only thing this did was guard against objects that have an
__annotations__attribute that is of some other type. That doesn't seem particularlyuseful, so I just removed the check.