django-stubs VS mypy

Pyright doesn't work with Django, as Django's so dynamic that it requires a plugin to infer all types correctly. Sadly, even mypy with plugins is a mess to get set up in vscode, especially if you want it to use the same config as you use for ci checks from the command line.

We use mypy + [django-stubs](https://github.com/typeddjango/django-stubs) (in a huge Django + drf project at day job) which includes a plugin for mypy allowing it to recognize all reverse relations and manager methods. Mypy is still really rough around the edges. The cli args are poorly documented, and how they correspond to declarations in a mypy.ini / pyproject.toml is mysterious. Match-statements still have bugs even a year after release. Exclusion of untyped / partially typed files and packages we've had to solve with grep filtering mypy's output for our whitelisted set of files, as it's been unable to separate properly between errors you care about (in your own codebase) and errors in others code (dependencies, untypable dynamic python packages etc).

The largest issue IMO is that mypy tried to adapt a java / OOP style way of type system onto python, instead of recognizing the language's real power within duck typing and passing structural types around. Typescript chose the right approach here, modelling javascript the way it is actually written, favoring structural over nominal typing, instead of the archaic and now left-behind way of Java-style OOP that has influenced mypy.

There was a recently accepted PEP which allowed for limited dataclass transforms, enough to cover the @attr.s usecase for both mypy and pyright, but nowhere near expressive enough to cover django's models and ORM sadly. It's probably impossible / undesirable to allow for such rich plugins, so i see the future for proper pluginless typing to be more akin to how pydantic / normal dataclasses solve typing, by starting with a specification of the types, deriving its runtime implementation, instead of plugins having to reverse the type representation of a custom DSL.

You can annotate the manager and get some typing help in the editor. And there’s django-stubs which helps a little when running mypy. It’s not as good as pycharm though.

https://github.com/typeddjango/django-stubs/tree/master

> Yes, there are type stubs for these libraries but they’re either forced to be more strict, preventing use of dynamism, or opt for being less strict but allowing you to use all the library features, at the cost of safety.

There are type stubs for Django that somewhat avoid these compromises: https://github.com/typeddjango/django-stubs

To be able to do this they have to use a Mypy plugin though. And even then it's still far from perfect.

Mypy together with this plug-in gives you typing for django. https://github.com/TypedDjango/django-stubs

Have you looked at stubs for Django?

It's got type annotations and mypy has a discussion about it here as well: https://github.com/python/mypy/issues/1282

There is already an AOT compiler for Python: Nuitka[0]. But I don't think it's much faster.

And then there is mypyc[1] which uses mypy's static type annotations but is only slightly faster.

And various other compilers like Numba and Cython that work with specialized dialects of Python to achieve better results, but then it's not quite Python anymore.

[0] https://nuitka.net/

[1] https://github.com/python/mypy/tree/master/mypyc

In Python there is MyPy that can help with this. https://www.mypy-lang.org/

It's funny you should say this.

Reading this article prompted me to future-proof a program I maintain for fun that deals with time; it had one use of utcnow, which I fixed.

And then I tripped over a runtime type problem in an unrelated area of the code, despite the code being green under "mypy --strict". (and "100% coverage" from tests, except this particular exception only occured in a "# pragma: no-cover" codepath so it wasn't actually covered)

It turns out that because of some core decisions about how datetime objects work, `datetime.date.today() < datetime.datetime.now()` type-checks but gives a TypeError at runtime. Oops. (cause discussed at length in https://github.com/python/mypy/issues/9015 but without action for 3 years)

One solution is apparently to use `datetype` for type annotations (while continuing to use `datetime` objects at runtime): https://github.com/glyph/DateType

PEP 695 is great. I've been using mypy every day at work in last couple years or so with very strict parameters (no any type etc) and I have experience writing real life programs with Rust, Agda, and some Haskell before, so I'm familiar with strict type systems. I'm sure many will disagree with me but these are my very honest opinions as a professional who uses Python types every day:

* Some types are better than no types. I love Python types, and I consider them required. Even if they're not type-checked they're better than no types. If they're type-checked it's even better. If things are typed properly (no any etc) and type-checked that's even better. And so on...

* Having said this, Python's type system as checked by mypy feels like a toy type system. It's very easy to fool it, and you need to be careful so that type-checking actually fails badly formed programs.

* The biggest issue I face are exceptions. Community discussed this many times [1] [2] and the overall consensus is to not check exceptions. I personally disagree as if you have a Python program that's meticulously typed and type-checked exceptions still cause bad states and since Python code uses exceptions liberally, it's pretty easy to accidentally go to a bad state. E.g. in the linked github issue JukkaL (developer) claims checking things like "KeyError" will create too many false positives, I strongly disagree. If a function can realistically raise a "KeyError" the program should be properly written to accept this at some level otherwise something that returns type T but 0.01% of the time raises "KeyError" should actually be typed "Raises[T, KeyError]".

* PEP 695 will help because typing things particularly is very helpful. Often you want to pass bunch of Ts around but since this is impractical some devs resort to passing "dict[str, Any]"s around and thus things type-check but you still get "KeyError" left and right. It's better to have "SomeStructure[T]" types with "T" as your custom data type (whether dataclass, or pydantic, or traditional class) so that type system has more opportunities to reject bad programs.

* Overall, I'm personally very optimistic about the future of types in Python!

[1] https://github.com/python/mypy/issues/1773

# is fixed: https://github.com/python/mypy/issues/12987.

You probably already know but you can add type hints and then check for consistency with https://github.com/python/mypy in python.

Modern Python with things like https://learnpython.com/blog/python-match-case-statement/ + mypy + Ruff for linting https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff can get pretty good results.

I found typed dataclasses (https://docs.python.org/3/library/dataclasses.html) in python using mypy to give me really high confidence when building data representations.