Skip to content

fix(python): suppress weak same-name CALLS for get/run/execute - #1386

Open
Joseph-MingEn wants to merge 1 commit into
DeusData:mainfrom
Joseph-MingEn:fix/py-suppress-weak-generic-calls
Open

fix(python): suppress weak same-name CALLS for get/run/execute#1386
Joseph-MingEn wants to merge 1 commit into
DeusData:mainfrom
Joseph-MingEn:fix/py-suppress-weak-generic-calls

Conversation

@Joseph-MingEn

@Joseph-MingEn Joseph-MingEn commented Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary

  • Suppress weak short-name CALLS resolution for Python attribute calls and bare generic callees (get / run / execute), mirroring the existing TS/JS weak-method guard.
  • Flag Python attribute calls as is_method during extraction so prior_cp.get(...) cannot suffix_match onto unrelated Methods (e.g. _SessionRegistry.get).
  • Same guard drops bare run() Callable-parameter calls from binding to unrelated Methods (e.g. SatoriLive.run).

Motivation (Yui WP-B C2 / G2)

On a large Python repo, trace_path hop-1 showed fabricated CALLS:

  • router.submit_task → _SessionRegistry.get via strategy=suffix_match / callee=prior_cp.get / conf 0.28
  • gate._run_with_heavy_slot → SatoriLive.run via suffix_match / bare run() / conf 0.28

Strong strategies (import_map, same_module, lsp_*) are kept.

Test plan

  • ./build/c/test-runner registry (includes new python suppress unit tests)
  • ./build/c/test-runner pipeline (includes pipeline_python_suppresses_weak_generic_edges)
  • Maintainer CI green

Made with Cursor

@Joseph-MingEn @cursoragent
fix(python): suppress weak same-name CALLS for get/run/execute
9daa96f 
Mirror TS/JS weak-method guards for Python attribute calls and bare
generic callees so suffix_match cannot bind prior_cp.get / run() onto
unrelated Methods (G2 / Yui WP-B C2).

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
@Joseph-MingEn
Joseph-MingEn requested a review from DeusData as a code owner July 31, 2026 16:33
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Thanks for opening this — it has been seen, and it is queued.

This note is automated, but it is not a brush-off: it exists so you know where your PR stands instead of having to guess from silence.

Current review status: working through a backlog. 0.9.1-rc.1 is out, so the release freeze that held reviews is over — but it left a large queue of open pull requests behind it, and we are reading through them oldest-first. The background is in discussion #1144.

What that means for this PR, concretely:

  • It will not be closed for inactivity. No stale bot touches pull requests here.
  • It may still sit a while before a human reads it. That is on us, not on you.
  • Older PRs are read first, so a recent one is not being skipped — it is behind a queue.

Things that will genuinely speed it up whenever review does happen:

  • Keep it rebased on main — the tree is moving quickly right now, and a conflicting branch cannot be reviewed as the diff you intended.
  • Get CI green, or say which failures you believe are pre-existing.
  • Keep the change to one claim. Bundled features and refactors get split before they get merged, which costs you a round trip.
  • Every commit needs a sign-off (git commit -s) — CI enforces DCO.

If this fixes a bug, a reproduction we can run is worth more than a description of the symptom.

Thanks for contributing, and sorry in advance for the wait.

@DeusData DeusData mentioned this pull request Aug 3, 2026
Open
@DeusData DeusData added bug Something isn't working parsing/quality Graph extraction bugs, false positives, missing edges priority/high Needs near-term maintainer attention; high-impact bug, regression, safety issue, or release blocker. labels Aug 3, 2026
@DeusData DeusData added this to the 0.9.1-rc milestone Aug 3, 2026
@DeusData

DeusData commented Aug 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Thank you for the focused Python same-name fallback suppression and the tests around generic method names. This is now routed as a high-priority parsing fix in 0.9.1-rc and linked to the remaining scope in #1355. This is triage rather than approval; our review queue is full, so the detailed review may take a little time, especially because the PR addresses only one part of the broader binding problem.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@DeusData DeusData Awaiting requested review from DeusData DeusData is a code owner

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

bug Something isn't working parsing/quality Graph extraction bugs, false positives, missing edges priority/high Needs near-term maintainer attention; high-impact bug, regression, safety issue, or release blocker.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

0.10.0-rc

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@Joseph-MingEn @DeusData