Hacktoberfest 2026：維護者為十月標記出來的 issue，仍然開放、適合新手。 瀏覽 Hacktoberfest issue

Relaxing usage of `type` with `typing.Protocol` in typing spec

未關閉
  • 哪裡不對？
#2,306 3 則留言 1 個 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 檢視

還沒有人認領這個 Issue。

評估

難度
5/5
預估耗時
一週以上
新手友好度
35/100
Issue 類型
功能
描述清晰度
需要釐清
活躍度
冷清
技術堆疊
python
領域
documentation

研究方向

先閱讀關於 typing 規範的討論和連結的 Python Discourse 討論串，然後比較其中針對 mypy、pyright 和 ty 所描述的行為。查看 mypy#4717 以了解相關範例。完成的標準是就 type[P] 是否可以接受不可具現化的 Protocol 型別達成共識，並記錄由此產生的規則。

由索引模型根據 Issue 內容生成。

描述

topic: typing spec

Some time ago I opened a thread on the Python discourse about implementing an AbstractType semantic that would allow functions to receive non-instantiable types so to try and conform a bit the situation presented in the the thread.

Consider the snippet:

from abc import abstractmethod
from typing import runtime_checkable, Protocol, TypeVar, TypeGuard

@runtime_checkable
class MyProtocol(Protocol):
    @abstractmethod
    def my_method(self) -> str:
        ...

class MyClass:
    def my_method(self) -> str:
        return "Hello from MyClass!"
    
class MyOtherClass:
    def another_method(self) -> str:
        return "Hello from MyOtherClass!"
    

P = TypeVar('P', bound=MyProtocol)
    
def check_protocol(obj: object, protocol: type[P]) -> TypeGuard[P]:
    return isinstance(obj, protocol)

# Example usage
my_obj = MyClass()
my_other_obj = MyOtherClass()
if check_protocol(my_obj, MyProtocol):
    print(my_obj.my_method())
if check_protocol(my_other_obj, MyProtocol):
    print(my_other_obj.my_method())
else:
    print("Object does not implement MyProtocol.")

Output:

Hello from MyClass!
my_obj does not implement MyOtherClass protocol.

At runtime, this works as intended. At type checking time, mypy complains that check_protocol cannot accept a non-instantiable type, while pyright and ty are accepting this behavior.

According to the typing specification, mypy is technically correct (the best kind of correct), but this code is perfectly acceptable. There are other examples referenced in python/mypy#4717 (which is the 3rd most upvoted issue by 👍 by the way).

I was hoping for more discussion points presented in the thread but not many replied. I didn't want to monopolize it, so I'm trying my luck here.

@JelleZijlstra (sorry for the ping) did point out that it might be worthwhile to change the spec to allow this behavior but I'm guessing there should be some discussion on how to deal with it first. Jelle suggested: "If you want it to be instantiable, use Callable[] instead."

I do agree it makes sense, but this snippet:

from typing import Protocol

class MyProtocol(Protocol):
    def method(self) -> str:
        ...
print(callable(MyProtocol)) # prints True

confuses me.

So my point is: could the spec allow for type to accept non-instantiable types, since it seems to be a pretty common pattern? Is there a way to effectively deal with the separation between instantiable and non-instantiable types?

I tried adding the "typing spec" label but couldn't. At any rate, thank you for the consideration.

主要語言
Python
星號
1.8k
分支
302
平均合併
4 小時 38 分鐘
30 天內合併 PR
6

環境準備

這個專案沒有提供開發容器、Dockerfile 或貢獻指南，環境需要你自己搭建：先看它的 README，通用步驟見我們的新手貢獻指南。

從這裡開始

  1. 先讀完整個 Issue，再讀專案的貢獻指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言說明你要接手 —— 這能避免兩個人做同樣的事。
  3. Fork 儲存庫，在一個分支上完成修改。
  4. 送出 Pull Request，並在描述裡引用這個 Issue 編號。

python/typing 的其他 Issue

查看 python/typing 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Python Issue

把新 issue 寄到你的電子郵件信箱

精選適合新手參與的 GitHub issue 摘要。