Refactor and improve narrowing for type(x) == t checks #20634
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
According to mypy_primer, this change doesn't affect type check results on a corpus of open source code. ✅ |
Collaborator
Author
|
I'm going to go ahead and merge this one, but please feel free to lmk if you have feedback |
This was referenced Jan 23, 2026
JukkaL
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 23, 2026
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rewrites this logic to fit in with the new narrowing I do. Cleans things up, makes things a little faster, and improves semantics on some not realistic edge cases for chained comparisons