Fix untyped functions in core/dbt/context/base.py

[QMalcolm]

resolves #8394

Problem

We have a lot of untyped functions in core/dbt/context/base.py this means that

1. There is a lot of type checking that is not happening
2. When a type issue occurs in the file a bunch of can't type check untyped functions warnings appear

Solution

ADD TYPES TO ALL THE THINGS 🎉

Checklist

• I have read the contributing guide and understand what's expected of me
• I have run this code in development and it appears to resolve the stated issue
• This PR includes tests, or tests are not required/relevant for this PR
• This PR has no interface changes (e.g. macros, cli, logs, json artifacts, config files, adapter interface, etc) or this PR has already received feedback and approval from Product or DX

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 98.93% and project coverage change: +1.77% 🎉

Comparison is base (d8e8a78) 84.58% compared to head (a613ef0) 86.36%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8525      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   84.58%   86.36%   +1.77%     
==========================================
  Files         174      174              
  Lines       25579    25578       -1     
==========================================
+ Hits        21637    22090     +453     
+ Misses       3942     3488     -454     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	83.16% <98.93%> (+2.05%)	⬆️
unit	65.03% <98.93%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
core/dbt/context/base.py	89.01% <97.82%> (-0.05%)	⬇️
core/dbt/context/configured.py	97.53% <100.00%> (ø)
core/dbt/context/docs.py	96.77% <100.00%> (ø)
core/dbt/context/manifest.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
core/dbt/context/providers.py	88.66% <100.00%> (+0.86%)	⬆️
core/dbt/context/secret.py	79.16% <100.00%> (ø)
core/dbt/context/target.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 33 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[QMalcolm]

I'm very confused on how the functions contextmember and contextproperty operate. They are function decorators, and in python function decorators are required to return a callable. However... in cases where the value passed into the decorator isn't a string, we return an object (ContextMember). Thus typing these two functions is neigh impossible because currently we have to state that one of the return types must be a bare ContextMember object, which then every invocation of the decorator complains about.

[McKnight-42]

Out of curiosity is this a different way of approaching the change we reverted here #8306?

[QMalcolm]

Out of curiosity is this a different way of approaching the change we reverted here #8306?

@McKnight-42 I'm not wholly sure, but I don't think so. I could absolutely be wrong about that though. My understanding of issue #8153 is that all numeric values were being forced into floats, and the solution (#8306) was to actually add an Integer object for creating integer numeric types. In this PR we're not adding or changing any functionality of the code itself (with the exception of a613ef0). The primary focus of this PR is defining what the expected return type of a function should be. That way when we run mypy, it can properly check all of our typing. These function return type definitions are actually thrown away at run time and don't actually affect the operation of the code.

[McKnight-42]

ah makes sense thanks for clarification @QMalcolm