Skip to content

Allow Final attributes declared in class body if initialized in ctor #8982

Open
0 of 1 issue completed

Description

@llchan

There is currently a safety check around TypeVar-dependent Final attributes declared in the class body that I believe we can loosen when the variable is assigned in the ctor. This should work analogously to non-TypeVar-dependent final attributes declared in the class body, which also require an assignment in the ctor (otherwise they emit "Final name must be initialized with a value").

  • Are you reporting a bug, or opening a feature request? feature request
  • Please insert below the code you are checking with mypy,
    or a mock-up repro if the source is private. We would appreciate
    if you try to simplify your case to a minimal repro.
    from typing import Final, Generic, TypeVar
    
    
    WidgetT = TypeVar('WidgetT', bound='Widget')
    
    
    class Widget:
        pass
    
    
    class WidgetHolder(Generic[WidgetT]):
    
        widget: Final[WidgetT]
    
        def __init__(self, widget: WidgetT) -> None:
            self.widget = widget
  • What is the actual behavior/output?
    final.py: note: In class "WidgetHolder":
    final.py:13:5: error: Final name declared in class body cannot depend on type variables  [misc]
            widget: Final[WidgetT]
            ^
    

In case anyone comes across this issue, the workaround is currently to not declare in the class body, but declare in the ctor with self.widget: Final[WidgetT] = widget instead. But just because a workaround exists doesn't mean we shouldn't try to fix this.

Activity

  1. Kangaroux commented on Jun 10, 2020

    @Kangaroux

    C# has this feature with a readonly keyword. It would be nice to have here. You can modify the field as much as you want within the constructor but after that it's considered const.

  2. llchan commented on Jun 11, 2020

    @llchan
    ContributorAuthor

    @Kangaroux yep that's the intent of Final as well, and for the most part it already works like const or readonly. This issue is more about an implementation restriction, where the declaration is not allowed to be generic even when the constructor initializes it with a compatible object.

  3. dtoniolo commented on Jan 19, 2023

    @dtoniolo

    This is issue is over two years old, but i've just came across the exact same problem.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions