But at runtime this can raise a TypeError if not quoted.

Which begs the question, should ctypes.py_object define __class_getitem__ at runtime, to mirror the stubs?

But at runtime this can raise a TypeError if not quoted.

Which begs the question, should ctypes.py_object define __class_getitem__ at runtime, to mirror the stubs?

Maybe? But even if that were to be changed in cpython, then that'd only fix it for 3.14+ or something. So I suppose that this would still be relevant

It seems that there's very few instances of generic py_object being used in the wild, most of which are from numpy/optypes. Is it being generic actually useful? I wonder if it would make sense to specialize it to Any or object

It seems that there's very few instances of generic py_object being used in the wild, most of which are from numpy/optypes.

Well, I admit that this is mostly self-interest, haha.

Oh and it's optype btw ;)

Is it being generic actually useful? I wonder if it would make sense to specialize it to Any or object

Not at the moment, no. But once mypy fully supports __new__, then I can make numpy.object_ generic. And then it would help to also have a generic ctypes.py_object.

According to mypy_primer, this change has no effect on the checked open source code. 🤖🎉