feat: :sparkles: Allow for `functools.partial` and functions returning an awaitable as autocomplete

[Paillat-dev]

Summary

Allows usage of functions with any number of optional parameters as autocomplete. This allows by extent the usage of partials and similar as autocomplete.

Fixes #2668

Information

• [x] This PR fixes an issue.
• [x] This PR adds something new (e.g. new method or parameters).
• [ ] This PR is a breaking change (e.g. methods or parameters removed/renamed).
• [ ] This PR is not a code change (e.g. documentation, README, typehinting, examples, ...).

Checklist

• [x] I have searched the open pull requests for duplicates.
• [x] If code changes were made then they have been tested.
  • [ ] I have updated the documentation to reflect the changes.
• [ ] If type: ignore comments were used, a comment is also left explaining why.
• [x] I have updated the changelog to include these changes.

[Paillat-dev]

@DefiDebauchery Would you mind testing this pr with your usecase and functools.partial?

[DefiDebauchery]

@DefiDebauchery Would you mind testing this pr with your usecase and functools.partial?

Yes, this did work on my side, thank you! While I also like the solution offered in https://github.com/Pycord-Development/pycord/issues/2668#issuecomment-2540044621, I do think partials make sense in many contexts, and it would be great to have support for those who need something quick.

[plun1331]

https://discord.com/channels/881207955029110855/881735314987708456/1316992273476747375

[Paillat-dev]

Oh shoot checks failing... This is why we should be using Annotated for options...

[Lulalaby]

Merge conflicts

[Paillat-dev]

Fixed

[Paillat-dev]

tbh I might as well give up this one and make it part of the options rewrite in next

[Lulalaby]

idk. we dunno when next comes out. i'd prefer if we still have it here

[Paillat-dev]

It's just that I don't really like that code I wrote but at the same time it's mainly because options are spaghetti code

[Paillat-dev]

This breaks autocomplete, please hold