Found it: this line has 5 space indentation.

ohhh, little bastard. thanks, should be fixed now :)

We should probably have a nicer __repr__ here.

Currently you get:

>>> from dataclasses import InitVar
>>> InitVar[int]
<dataclasses.InitVar object at 0x00A041C0>

I'd suggest something like:

    def __repr__(self):
        return f'dataclasses.InitVar[{self.type}]'

for starters, although typing.ClassVar does something more sophisticated in place of {self.type}. Maybe someday when we import typing from dataclasses we can switch to using their helper function. It's probably worth adding a comment to that effect, too.

Using f'dataclasses.InitVar[{self.type}]' would look like:

>>> from dataclasses import InitVar
>>> InitVar[int]
dataclasses.InitVar[<class 'int'>]

So I added f'dataclasses.InitVar[{self.type.__name__}]' instead. Should I write a test for this?

If that's what gives you the equivalent of:

>>> import typing
>>> typing.ClassVar[int]
typing.ClassVar[int]

Then I'm all for it.

Yes, we'll need tests for this. Nothing complex, InitVar[int] should be good enough.

Sorry for the delay, I added a really simple test:

self.assertEqual(InitVar[int].type, int)

Would you like tests using __repr__ and @dataclass?

I apologize for taking forever to get back to you on this.

Could you test the repr of an InitVar? Something like (untested) repr(InitVar[int]) == 'dataclasses.InitVar[int]'?

I promise I'll commit this as soon as you add this change.