[red-knot] simplify type lookup in function/class definitions #14303
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
When we look up the types of class bases or keywords (
metaclass
), we currently do this little dance: if there are type params, then look up the type usingSemanticModel
in the type-params scope, if not, look up the type directly in the definition's own scope, with support for deferred types.With inference of function parameter types, I'm now adding another case of this same dance, so I'm motivated to make it a bit more ergonomic.
Add support to
definition_expression_ty
to handle any sub-expression of a definition, whether it is in the definition's own scope or in a type-params sub-scope.Related to both #13693 and #14161.