Skip to content

[pyupgrade] Do not upgrade functional TypedDicts with private field names to the class-based syntax (UP013) #16219

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
AlexWaygood merged 3 commits into from
Feb 18, 2025
Merged

[pyupgrade] Do not upgrade functional TypedDicts with private field names to the class-based syntax (UP013) #16219

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
9ecf114
UP013: do not report functional form with private names
sobolevn Feb 17, 2025
0322064
Update convert_typed_dict_functional_to_class.rs
sobolevn Feb 18, 2025
d715b97
docs nits
AlexWaygood Feb 18, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions crates/ruff_linter/resources/test/fixtures/pyupgrade/UP013.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -46,3 +46,9 @@
X = TypedDict("X", {
"some_config": int, # important
})

# Private names should not be reported (OK)
WithPrivate = TypedDict("WithPrivate", {"__x": int})

# Dunder names should not be reported (OK)
WithDunder = TypedDict("WithDunder", {"__x__": int})
3 changes: 1 addition & 2 deletions crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/pyupgrade/rules/convert_typed_dict_functional_to_class.rs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,6 +1,5 @@
use ruff_diagnostics::{Applicability, Diagnostic, Edit, Fix, FixAvailability, Violation};
use ruff_macros::{derive_message_formats, ViolationMetadata};
use ruff_python_ast::helpers::is_dunder;
use ruff_python_ast::{self as ast, Arguments, Expr, ExprContext, Identifier, Keyword, Stmt};
use ruff_python_codegen::Generator;
use ruff_python_semantic::SemanticModel;
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -185,7 +184,7 @@ fn fields_from_dict_literal(items: &[ast::DictItem]) -> Option<Vec<Stmt>> {
if !is_identifier(field.to_str()) {
return None;
}
if is_dunder(field.to_str()) {
if field.to_str().starts_with("__") {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@AlexWaygood AlexWaygood Feb 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it would be good to add a comment here explaining why it's not safe to convert TypedDicts with these fields to the class-based syntax. And it might be useful to add a sentence or two to the docs explaining why not all functional TypedDicts can be converted (and that therefore this rule deliberately does not flag them), as well!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@sobolevn sobolevn Feb 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done

return None;
}
Some(create_field_assignment_stmt(field.to_str(), value))
Expand Down
5 changes: 5 additions & 0 deletions ..._linter/src/rules/pyupgrade/snapshots/ruff_linter__rules__pyupgrade__tests__UP013.py.snap
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -264,6 +264,8 @@ UP013.py:46:1: UP013 [*] Convert `X` from `TypedDict` functional to class syntax
47 | | "some_config": int, # important
48 | | })
| |__^ UP013
49 |
50 | # Private names should not be reported (OK)
|
= help: Convert `X` to class syntax

Expand All @@ -276,3 +278,6 @@ UP013.py:46:1: UP013 [*] Convert `X` from `TypedDict` functional to class syntax
48 |-})
46 |+class X(TypedDict):
47 |+ some_config: int
49 48 |
50 49 | # Private names should not be reported (OK)
51 50 | WithPrivate = TypedDict("WithPrivate", {"__x": int})
⚡