data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/78d01/78d0121057ef01b75628908c4ad7e1d6fcbadc34" alt=""
On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 23:51:58 +0000 Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> wrote:
Not a PEP proponent (or even a typing user), but I thought this had been made clear long ago. My understanding is that optional, incremental type hints are and have always been considered the primary use case for annotations by the BDFL and AFAICT the SC following the BDFL. If compatibility with typing is an issue, then the burden of implementing that is on the other application. Typing *might* do something to help, but it's not obligated to do so.
This was not my understanding of annotations when they were introduced e.g.: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3107/#use-cases
As I remember it, a decision about the purpose of annotations was *explicitly* not made when they were introduced.
This is also what I remember from the discussions at the time of PEP 3107. Annotations were purposefully use case-agnostic, and there was no stated desire to push for one use case or another. I don't think gradual typing was even on the radar, not in public comments anyway. Regards Antoine.