Would annotations() just access the dunder, like other builtins (and then result in the descriptor resolving __co_annotations__ as proposed), or would calling it be required to actually resolve __co_annotations__? I think it should probably be the former.
On 16/01/21 7:56 am, Larry Hastings wrote:
As mentioned previously in this
thread, typing.get_type_hints() is opinionated in ways that users of
annotations may not want.
This brings us back to my idea of introducing a new
annotations() function to hide the details. It wouldn't
be the same as get_type_hints(), since it wouldn't make
any assumptions about what the annotations mean.