Add conformance results for ty#2208
Conversation
| @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ | |||
| conformance_automated = "Fail" | |||
| conformant = "Unsupported" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This "Unsupported" doesn't feel right for the name generics_variance, because we support a lot of variance checking, but I guess what this file is really testing is all about enforcing not using the wrong explicit-variance legacy TypeVar in the wrong place, and we don't yet do that...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
dataclass_transform_converter.py should also not really be marked as "Unsupported", but I asked David to write me some notes for that one and he opened astral-sh/ruff#23088 instead 😆
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I tried the same with "constructors callable" but there were some subtleties in the fix that deserved more careful attention :)
| conformance_automated = "Fail" | ||
| conformant = "Partial" | ||
| notes = """ | ||
| Deliberately does not allow `str` to be narrowed to literal string types through equality or containment checks due to the possibility of `str` subclasses that could have unexpected equality semantics. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should make a PR to remove these assertions from the conformance suite. Unsound narrowing behavior is not required by the spec and shouldn't be asserted by the conformance suite.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agreed. But I'll do it as a followup.
AlexWaygood
added
the
topic: conformance tests
3 participants
No description provided.