PEP 612 – Parameter Specification Variables
- PEP
- 612
- Title
- Parameter Specification Variables
- Author
- Mark Mendoza <mendoza.mark.a at gmail.com>
- Sponsor
- Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org>
- BDFL-Delegate
- Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org>
- Discussions-To
- Typing-Sig <typing-sig at python.org>
- Status
- Accepted
- Type
- Standards Track
- Created
- 18-Dec-2019
- Python-Version
- 3.10
- Post-History
- 18-Dec-2019, 13-Jul-2020
Contents
Parameter Specification Variables
Abstract
There currently are two ways to specify the type of a callable, the
Callable[[int, str], bool]
syntax defined in PEP 484, and callback protocols from PEP
544. Neither of
these support forwarding the parameter types of one callable over to another
callable, making it difficult to annotate function decorators. This PEP proposes
typing.ParamSpec
and typing.Concatenate
to
support expressing these kinds of relationships.
Motivation
The existing standards for annotating higher order functions don’t give us the tools to annotate the following common decorator pattern satisfactorily:
from typing import Awaitable, Callable, TypeVar
R = TypeVar("R")
def add_logging(f: Callable[..., R]) -> Callable[..., Awaitable[R]]:
async def inner(*args: object, **kwargs: object) -> R:
await log_to_database()
return f(*args, **kwargs)
return inner
@add_logging
def takes_int_str(x: int, y: str) -> int:
return x + 7
await takes_int_str(1, "A")
await takes_int_str("B", 2) # fails at runtime
add_logging
, a decorator which logs before each entry into the decorated
function, is an instance of the Python idiom of one function passing all
arguments given to it over to another function. This is done through the
combination of the *args
and **kwargs
features in both parameters and in
arguments. When one defines a function (like inner
) that takes (*args,
**kwargs)
and goes on to call another function with (*args, **kwargs)
, the wrapping function can only be safely called in all of the ways that the
wrapped function could be safely called. To type this decorator, we’d like to be
able to place a dependency between the parameters of the callable f
and the
parameters of the returned function. PEP 484 supports dependencies between
single types, as in def append(l: typing.List[T], e: T) -> typing.List[T]:
...
, but there is no existing way to do so with a complicated entity like
the parameters of a function.
Due to the limitations of the status quo, the add_logging
example will type
check but will fail at runtime. inner
will pass the string “B” into
takes_int_str
, which will try to add 7 to it, triggering a type error.
This was not caught by the type checker because the decorated takes_int_str
was given the type Callable[..., Awaitable[int]]
(an ellipsis in place of
parameter types is specified to mean that we do no validation on arguments).
Without the ability to define dependencies between the parameters of different
callable types, there is no way, at present, to make add_logging
compatible
with all functions, while still preserving the enforcement of the parameters of
the decorated function.
With the addition of the ParamSpec
variables proposed by this
PEP, we can rewrite the previous example in a way that keeps the flexibility of
the decorator and the parameter enforcement of the decorated function.
from typing import Awaitable, Callable, ParamSpec, TypeVar
P = ParamSpec("P")
R = TypeVar("R")
def add_logging(f: Callable[P, R]) -> Callable[P, Awaitable[R]]:
async def inner(*args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> R:
await log_to_database()
return f(*args, **kwargs)
return inner
@add_logging
def takes_int_str(x: int, y: str) -> int:
return x + 7
await takes_int_str(1, "A") # Accepted
await takes_int_str("B", 2) # Correctly rejected by the type checker
Another common decorator pattern that has previously been impossible to type is the practice of adding or removing arguments from the decorated function. For example:
class Request:
...
def with_request(f: Callable[..., R]) -> Callable[..., R]:
def inner(*args: object, **kwargs: object) -> R:
return f(Request(), *args, **kwargs)
return inner
@with_request
def takes_int_str(request: Request, x: int, y: str) -> int:
# use request
return x + 7
takes_int_str(1, "A")
takes_int_str("B", 2) # fails at runtime
With the addition of the Concatenate
operator from this PEP, we can even
type this more complex decorator.
from typing import Concatenate
def with_request(f: Callable[Concatenate[Request, P], R]) -> Callable[P, R]:
def inner(*args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> R:
return f(Request(), *args, **kwargs)
return inner
@with_request
def takes_int_str(request: Request, x: int, y: str) -> int:
# use request
return x + 7
takes_int_str(1, "A") # Accepted
takes_int_str("B", 2) # Correctly rejected by the type checker
Specification
ParamSpec
Variables
Declaration
A parameter specification variable is defined in a similar manner to how a
normal type variable is defined with typing.TypeVar
.
from typing import ParamSpec
P = ParamSpec("P") # Accepted
P = ParamSpec("WrongName") # Rejected because P =/= WrongName
The runtime should accept bound
s and covariant
and contravariant
arguments in the declaration just as typing.TypeVar
does, but for now we
will defer the standardization of the semantics of those options to a later PEP.
Valid use locations
Previously only a list of parameter arguments ([A, B, C]
) or an ellipsis
(signifying “undefined parameters”) were acceptable as the first “argument” to
typing.Callable
. We now augment that with two new options: a parameter
specification variable (Callable[P, int]
) or a concatenation on a
parameter specification variable (Callable[Concatenate[int, P], int]
).
callable ::= Callable "[" parameters_expression, type_expression "]"
parameters_expression ::=
| "..."
| "[" [ type_expression ("," type_expression)* ] "]"
| parameter_specification_variable
| concatenate "["
type_expression ("," type_expression)* ","
parameter_specification_variable
"]"
where parameter_specification_variable
is a typing.ParamSpec
variable,
declared in the manner as defined above, and concatenate
is
typing.Concatenate
.
As before, parameters_expression
s by themselves are not acceptable in
places where a type is expected
def foo(x: P) -> P: ... # Rejected
def foo(x: Concatenate[int, P]) -> int: ... # Rejected
def foo(x: typing.List[P]) -> None: ... # Rejected
def foo(x: Callable[[int, str], P]) -> None: ... # Rejected
User-Defined Generic Classes
Just as defining a class as inheriting from Generic[T]
makes a class generic
for a single parameter (when T
is a TypeVar
), defining a class as
inheriting from Generic[P]
makes a class generic on
parameters_expression
s (when P
is a ParamSpec
).
T = TypeVar("T")
P_2 = ParamSpec("P_2")
class X(Generic[T, P]):
f: Callable[P, int]
x: T
def f(x: X[int, P_2]) -> str: ... # Accepted
def f(x: X[int, Concatenate[int, P_2]]) -> str: ... # Accepted
def f(x: X[int, [int, bool]]) -> str: ... # Accepted
def f(x: X[int, ...]) -> str: ... # Accepted
def f(x: X[int, int]) -> str: ... # Rejected
By the rules defined above, spelling a concrete instance of a class generic
with respect to only a single ParamSpec
would require unsightly double
brackets. For aesthetic purposes we allow these to be omitted.
class Z(Generic[P]):
f: Callable[P, int]
def f(x: Z[[int, str, bool]]) -> str: ... # Accepted
def f(x: Z[int, str, bool]) -> str: ... # Equivalent
# Both Z[[int, str, bool]] and Z[int, str, bool] express this:
class Z_instantiated:
f: Callable[[int, str, bool], int]
Semantics
The inference rules for the return type of a function invocation whose signature
contains a ParamSpec
variable are analogous to those around
evaluating ones with TypeVar
s.
def changes_return_type_to_str(x: Callable[P, int]) -> Callable[P, str]: ...
def returns_int(a: str, b: bool) -> int: ...
f = changes_return_type_to_str(returns_int) # f should have the type:
# (a: str, b: bool) -> str
f("A", True) # Accepted
f(a="A", b=True) # Accepted
f("A", "A") # Rejected
expects_str(f("A", True)) # Accepted
expects_int(f("A", True)) # Rejected
Just as with traditional TypeVars
, a user may include the same
ParamSpec
multiple times in the arguments of the same function,
to indicate a dependency between multiple arguments. In these cases a type
checker may choose to solve to a common behavioral supertype (i.e. a set of
parameters for which all of the valid calls are valid in both of the subtypes),
but is not obligated to do so.
P = ParamSpec("P")
def foo(x: Callable[P, int], y: Callable[P, int]) -> Callable[P, bool]: ...
def x_y(x: int, y: str) -> int: ...
def y_x(y: int, x: str) -> int: ...
foo(x_y, x_y) # Should return (x: int, y: str) -> bool
foo(x_y, y_x) # Could return (__a: int, __b: str) -> bool
# This works because both callables have types that are
# behavioral subtypes of Callable[[int, str], int]
def keyword_only_x(*, x: int) -> int: ...
def keyword_only_y(*, y: int) -> int: ...
foo(keyword_only_x, keyword_only_y) # Rejected
The constructors of user-defined classes generic on ParamSpec
s should be
evaluated in the same way.
U = TypeVar("U")
class Y(Generic[U, P]):
f: Callable[P, str]
prop: U
def __init__(self, f: Callable[P, str], prop: U) -> None:
self.f = f
self.prop = prop
def a(q: int) -> str: ...
Y(a, 1) # Should resolve to Y[(q: int), int]
Y(a, 1).f # Should resolve to (q: int) -> str
The semantics of Concatenate[X, Y, P]
are that it represents the parameters
represented by P
with two positional-only parameters prepended. This means
that we can use it to represent higher order functions that add, remove or
transform a finite number of parameters of a callable.
def bar(x: int, *args: bool) -> int: ...
def add(x: Callable[P, int]) -> Callable[Concatenate[str, P], bool]: ...
add(bar) # Should return (__a: str, x: int, *args: bool) -> bool
def remove(x: Callable[Concatenate[int, P], int]) -> Callable[P, bool]: ...
remove(bar) # Should return (*args: bool) -> bool
def transform(
x: Callable[Concatenate[int, P], int]
) -> Callable[Concatenate[str, P], bool]: ...
transform(bar) # Should return (__a: str, *args: bool) -> bool
This also means that while any function that returns an R
can satisfy
typing.Callable[P, R]
, only functions that can be called positionally in
their first position with a X
can satisfy
typing.Callable[Concatenate[X, P], R]
.
def expects_int_first(x: Callable[Concatenate[int, P], int]) -> None: ...
@expects_int_first # Rejected
def one(x: str) -> int: ...
@expects_int_first # Rejected
def two(*, x: int) -> int: ...
@expects_int_first # Rejected
def three(**kwargs: int) -> int: ...
@expects_int_first # Accepted
def four(*args: int) -> int: ...
There are still some classes of decorators still not supported with these features:
- those that add/remove/change a variable number of parameters (for
example,
functools.partial
will remain untypable even after this PEP) - those that add/remove/change keyword-only parameters (See Concatenating Keyword Parameters for more details).
The components of a ParamSpec
A ParamSpec
captures both positional and keyword accessible
parameters, but there unfortunately is no object in the runtime that captures
both of these together. Instead, we are forced to separate them into *args
and **kwargs
, respectively. This means we need to be able to split apart
a single ParamSpec
into these two components, and then bring
them back together into a call. To do this, we introduce P.args
to
represent the tuple of positional arguments in a given call and
P.kwargs
to represent the corresponding Mapping
of keywords to
values.
Valid use locations
These “properties” can only be used as the annotated types for
*args
and **kwargs
, accessed from a ParamSpec already in scope.
def puts_p_into_scope(f: Callable[P, int]) -> None:
def inner(*args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> None: # Accepted
pass
def mixed_up(*args: P.kwargs, **kwargs: P.args) -> None: # Rejected
pass
def misplaced(x: P.args) -> None: # Rejected
pass
def out_of_scope(*args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> None: # Rejected
pass
Furthermore, because the default kind of parameter in Python ((x: int)
)
may be addressed both positionally and through its name, two valid invocations
of a (*args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs)
function may give different
partitions of the same set of parameters. Therefore, we need to make sure that
these special types are only brought into the world together, and are used
together, so that our usage is valid for all possible partitions.
def puts_p_into_scope(f: Callable[P, int]) -> None:
stored_args: P.args # Rejected
stored_kwargs: P.kwargs # Rejected
def just_args(*args: P.args) -> None: # Rejected
pass
def just_kwargs(**kwargs: P.kwargs) -> None: # Rejected
pass
Semantics
With those requirements met, we can now take advantage of the unique properties afforded to us by this set up:
- Inside the function,
args
has the typeP.args
, notTuple[P.args, ...]
as would be with a normal annotation (and likewise with the**kwargs
)- This special case is necessary to encapsulate the heterogeneous contents
of the
args
/kwargs
of a given call, which cannot be expressed by an indefinite tuple/dictionary type.
- This special case is necessary to encapsulate the heterogeneous contents
of the
- A function of type
Callable[P, R]
can be called with(*args, **kwargs)
if and only ifargs
has the typeP.args
andkwargs
has the typeP.kwargs
, and that those types both originated from the same function declaration. - A function declared as
def inner(*args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> X
has typeCallable[P, X]
.
With these three properties, we now have the ability to fully type check parameter preserving decorators.
def decorator(f: Callable[P, int]) -> Callable[P, None]:
def foo(*args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> None:
f(*args, **kwargs) # Accepted, should resolve to int
f(*kwargs, **args) # Rejected
f(1, *args, **kwargs) # Rejected
return foo # Accepted
To extend this to include Concatenate
, we declare the following properties:
- A function of type
Callable[Concatenate[A, B, P], R]
can only be called with(a, b, *args, **kwargs)
whenargs
andkwargs
are the respective components ofP
,a
is of typeA
andb
is of typeB
. - A function declared as
def inner(a: A, b: B, *args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> R
has typeCallable[Concatenate[A, B, P], R]
. Placing keyword-only parameters between the*args
and**kwargs
is forbidden.
def add(f: Callable[P, int]) -> Callable[Concatenate[str, P], None]:
def foo(s: str, *args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> None: # Accepted
pass
def bar(*args: P.args, s: str, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> None: # Rejected
pass
return foo # Accepted
def remove(f: Callable[Concatenate[int, P], int]) -> Callable[P, None]:
def foo(*args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> None:
f(1, *args, **kwargs) # Accepted
f(*args, 1, **kwargs) # Rejected
f(*args, **kwargs) # Rejected
return foo
Note that the names of the parameters preceding the ParamSpec
components are not mentioned in the resulting Concatenate
. This means that
these parameters can not be addressed via a named argument:
def outer(f: Callable[P, None]) -> Callable[P, None]:
def foo(x: int, *args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> None:
f(*args, **kwargs)
def bar(*args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> None:
foo(1, *args, **kwargs) # Accepted
foo(x=1, *args, **kwargs) # Rejected
return bar
This is not an implementation convenience, but a soundness requirement. If we were to allow that second calling style, then the following snippet would be problematic.
@outer
def problem(*, x: object) -> None:
pass
problem(x="uh-oh")
Inside of bar
, we would get
TypeError: foo() got multiple values for argument 'x'
. Requiring these
concatenated arguments to be addressed positionally avoids this kind of problem,
and simplifies the syntax for spelling these types. Note that this also why we
have to reject signatures of the form
(*args: P.args, s: str, **kwargs: P.kwargs)
(See
Concatenating Keyword Parameters for more details).
If one of these prepended positional parameters contains a free ParamSpec
,
we consider that variable in scope for the purposes of extracting the components
of that ParamSpec
. That allows us to spell things like this:
def twice(f: Callable[P, int], *args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> int:
return f(*args, **kwargs) + f(*args, **kwargs)
The type of twice
in the above example is
Callable[Concatenate[Callable[P, int], P], int]
, where P
is bound by the
outer Callable
. This has the following semantics:
def a_int_b_str(a: int, b: str) -> int:
pass
twice(a_int_b_str, 1, "A") # Accepted
twice(a_int_b_str, b="A", a=1) # Accepted
twice(a_int_b_str, "A", 1) # Rejected
Backwards Compatibility
The only changes necessary to existing features in typing
is allowing these
ParamSpec
and Concatenate
objects to be the first parameter to
Callable
and to be a parameter to Generic
. Currently Callable
expects a list of types there and Generic
expects single types, so they are
currently mutually exclusive. Otherwise, existing code that doesn’t reference
the new interfaces will be unaffected.
Reference Implementation
The Pyre type checker supports all of the behavior
described above. A reference implementation of the runtime components needed
for those uses is provided in the pyre_extensions
module. A reference
implementation for CPython can be found
here.
Rejected Alternatives
Using List Variadics and Map Variadics
We considered just trying to make something like this with a callback protocol which was parameterized on a list-type variadic, and a map-type variadic like so:
R = typing.TypeVar(“R”)
Tpositionals = ...
Tkeywords = ...
class BetterCallable(typing.Protocol[Tpositionals, Tkeywords, R]):
def __call__(*args: Tpositionals, **kwargs: Tkeywords) -> R: ...
However, there are some problems with trying to come up with a consistent solution for those type variables for a given callable. This problem comes up with even the simplest of callables:
def simple(x: int) -> None: ...
simple <: BetterCallable[[int], [], None]
simple <: BetterCallable[[], {“x”: int}, None]
BetterCallable[[int], [], None] </: BetterCallable[[], {“x”: int}, None]
Any time where a type can implement a protocol in more than one way that aren’t mutually compatible, we can run into situations where we lose information. If we were to make a decorator using this protocol, we would have to pick one calling convention to prefer.
def decorator(
f: BetterCallable[[Ts], [Tmap], int],
) -> BetterCallable[[Ts], [Tmap], str]:
def decorated(*args: Ts, **kwargs: Tmap) -> str:
x = f(*args, **kwargs)
return int_to_str(x)
return decorated
@decorator
def foo(x: int) -> int:
return x
reveal_type(foo) # Option A: BetterCallable[[int], {}, str]
# Option B: BetterCallable[[], {x: int}, str]
foo(7) # fails under option B
foo(x=7) # fails under option A
The core problem here is that, by default, parameters in Python can either be
called positionally or as a keyword argument. This means we really have
three categories (positional-only, positional-or-keyword, keyword-only) we’re
trying to jam into two categories. This is the same problem that we briefly
mentioned when discussing .args
and .kwargs
. Fundamentally, in order to
capture two categories when there are some things that can be in either
category, we need a higher level primitive (ParamSpec
) to
capture all three, and then split them out afterward.
Defining ParametersOf
Another proposal we considered was defining ParametersOf
and ReturnType
operators which would operate on a domain of a newly defined Function
type.
Function
would be callable with, and only with ParametersOf[F]
.
ParametersOf
and ReturnType
would only operate on type variables with
precisely this bound. The combination of these three features could express
everything that we can express with ParamSpecs
.
F = TypeVar("F", bound=Function)
def no_change(f: F) -> F:
def inner(
*args: ParametersOf[F].args,
**kwargs: ParametersOf[F].kwargs
) -> ReturnType[F]:
return f(*args, **kwargs)
return inner
def wrapping(f: F) -> Callable[ParametersOf[F], List[ReturnType[F]]]:
def inner(
*args: ParametersOf[F].args,
**kwargs: ParametersOf[F].kwargs
) -> List[ReturnType[F]]:
return [f(*args, **kwargs)]
return inner
def unwrapping(
f: Callable[ParametersOf[F], List[R]]
) -> Callable[ParametersOf[F], R]:
def inner(
*args: ParametersOf[F].args,
**kwargs: ParametersOf[F].kwargs
) -> R:
return f(*args, **kwargs)[0]
return inner
We decided to go with ParamSpec
s over this approach for several reasons:
- The footprint of this change would be larger, as we would need two new
operators, and a new type, while
ParamSpec
just introduces a new variable. - Python typing has so far has avoided supporting operators, whether
user-defined or built-in, in favor of destructuring. Accordingly,
ParamSpec
based signatures look much more like existing Python. - The lack of user-defined operators makes common patterns hard to spell.
unwrapping
is odd to read becauseF
is not actually referring to any callable. It’s just being used as a container for the parameters we wish to propagate. It would read better if we could define an operatorRemoveList[List[X]] = X
and thenunwrapping
could takeF
and returnCallable[ParametersOf[F], RemoveList[ReturnType[F]]]
. Without that, we unfortunately get into a situation where we have to use aFunction
-variable as an improvisedParamSpec
, in that we never actually bind the return type.
In summary, between these two equivalently powerful syntaxes, ParamSpec
fits
much more naturally into the status quo.
Concatenating Keyword Parameters
In principle the idea of concatenation as a means to modify a finite number of positional parameters could be expanded to include keyword parameters.
def add_n(f: Callable[P, R]) -> Callable[Concatenate[("n", int), P], R]:
def inner(*args: P.args, n: int, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> R:
# use n
return f(*args, **kwargs)
return inner
However, the key distinction is that while prepending positional-only parameters
to a valid callable type always yields another valid callable type, the same
cannot be said for adding keyword-only parameters. As alluded to above , the
issue is name collisions. The parameters Concatenate[("n", int), P]
are
only valid when P
itself does not already have a parameter named n
.
def innocent_wrapper(f: Callable[P, R]) -> Callable[P, R]:
def inner(*args: P.args, **kwargs: P.kwargs) -> R:
added = add_n(f)
return added(*args, n=1, **kwargs)
return inner
@innocent_wrapper
def problem(n: int) -> None:
pass
Calling problem(2)
works fine, but calling problem(n=2)
leads to a
TypeError: problem() got multiple values for argument 'n'
from the call to
added
inside of innocent_wrapper
.
This kind of situation could be avoided, and this kind of decorator could be typed if we could reify the constraint that a set of parameters not contain a certain name, with something like:
P_without_n = ParamSpec("P_without_n", banned_names=["n"])
def add_n(
f: Callable[P_without_n, R]
) -> Callable[Concatenate[("n", int), P_without_n], R]: ...
The call to add_n
inside of innocent_wrapper
could then be rejected
since the callable was not guaranteed not to already have a parameter named
n
.
However, enforcing these constraints would require enough additional
implementation work that we judged this extension to be out of scope of this
PEP. Fortunately the design of ParamSpec
s are such that we can return to
this idea later if there is sufficient demand.
Naming this a ParameterSpecification
We decided that ParameterSpecification was a little too long-winded for use here, and that this style of abbreviated name made it look more like TypeVar.
Naming this an ArgSpec
We think that calling this a ParamSpec is more correct than referring to it as an ArgSpec, since callables have parameters, which are distinct from the arguments which are passed to them in a given call site. A given binding for a ParamSpec is a set of function parameters, not a call-site’s arguments.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to all of the members of the Pyre team for their comments on early drafts of this PEP, and for their help with the reference implementation.
Thanks are also due to the whole Python typing community for their early
feedback on this idea at a Python typing meetup, leading directly to the much
more compact .args
/.kwargs
syntax.
Copyright
This document is placed in the public domain or under the CC0-1.0-Universal license, whichever is more permissive.
Source: https://github.com/python/peps/blob/master/pep-0612.rst
Last modified: 2021-09-17 18:18:24 GMT