html_url,issue_url,id,node_id,user,created_at,updated_at,author_association,body,reactions,performed_via_github_app,issue
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/7519#issuecomment-1449430920,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7519,1449430920,IC_kwDOAMm_X85WZI-I,43316012,2023-03-01T06:34:48Z,2023-03-01T06:35:08Z,COLLABORATOR,"> Should we special case a solution? Seems user-friendly to do so.

I think dict_keys is its own type so with some type ignore this could work.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1579956621
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/7519#issuecomment-1449078217,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7519,1449078217,IC_kwDOAMm_X85WXy3J,2448579,2023-02-28T23:22:22Z,2023-02-28T23:22:22Z,MEMBER,Should we special case a solution? Seems user-friendly to do so.,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1579956621
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/7519#issuecomment-1426262335,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7519,1426262335,IC_kwDOAMm_X85VAwk_,43316012,2023-02-10T19:48:25Z,2023-02-10T19:48:25Z,COLLABORATOR,See https://github.com/python/mypy/issues/14674,"{""total_count"": 2, ""+1"": 2, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1579956621
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/7519#issuecomment-1426254152,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7519,1426254152,IC_kwDOAMm_X85VAulI,43316012,2023-02-10T19:39:39Z,2023-02-10T19:39:39Z,COLLABORATOR,"Thats a weird issue. I don't think we are at fault here, since apparently mypy thinks that dict_keys is Hashable (and pylance as well).

```
def f(a: Hashable) -> int
    pass
f({}.keys())  # does not raise an error
```

I guess I will raise an issue over at mypy, but probably they will simply claim that Hashable support is not good yet...","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1579956621
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/7519#issuecomment-1426097606,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7519,1426097606,IC_kwDOAMm_X85VAIXG,25172489,2023-02-10T17:07:25Z,2023-02-10T17:07:25Z,NONE,"The only obvious difference being that one overload annotates `self`, while the other doesn't. But apart from this, the annotations look straightforward (and correct) to me.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1579956621
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/7519#issuecomment-1426084810,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7519,1426084810,IC_kwDOAMm_X85VAFPK,2443309,2023-02-10T16:57:54Z,2023-02-10T16:57:54Z,MEMBER,"Thanks for the report @derhintze. I agree this seems like a bug. I'm a bit confused by this actually. Our `__getitem__` implementation is here:

https://github.com/pydata/xarray/blob/7683442774c8036e0b13851df62bda067b2a65d5/xarray/core/dataset.py#L1418-L1441

and the keys view of a dataset is not hashable:

```python
isinstance(d.keys(), typing.Hashable)
False
```

Which should be triggering the second `@overload` in the code above. So I'm not sure what's going on!","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1579956621