__slots__ only make a class a disjoint base if__slots__ are set to a non-empty sequence:

>>>classFoo:...__slots__= ()...     >>>classBar:...__slots__= ()...     >>>classBaz(Foo,Bar):......

does this logic account for that?

Oh yes this is wrong, it also includes slots from parent classes.

if it's a disjoint base at runtime because it has__slots__, maybe we could change the error message to say "has__slots__ at runtime (making it a disjoint base), but doesn't have__slots__ in the stub"? And ideally tell the user what the__slots__ are at runtime.

Otherwise I worry we'll have contributors adding@disjoint_base to the stubs because a stubtest error message told them to, when actually they should be adding__slots__

The code now doesn't make you add@disjoint_base if there are__slots__. Instead stubtest (somewhere else) should just directly tell you to add__slots__.

ohh, I see, sorry! I misread