April 12, 2021 4:59 PM, "Brett Cannon" <brett@python.org> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 3:01 AM Hugh Fisher <hugo.fisher@gmail.com> wrote:
Message: 1 Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:31:12 -0700 From: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org> Subject: [Python-Dev] Re: PEP 647 Accepted
This is something the SC has been musing about, but as it’s not a fully formed idea, I’m a little
hesitant to bring it up. That said, it’s somewhat relevant: We wonder if it may be time to in a sense separate the typing syntax from Python’s regular syntax. TypeGuards are a case where if typing had more flexibility to adopt syntax that wasn’t strictly legal “normal” Python, maybe something more intuitive could have been proposed. I wonder if the typing-sig has discussed this possibility (in the future, of course)?
[ munch ]
Agreed. It’s interesting that PEP 593 proposes a different approach to enriching the typing
system. Typing itself is becoming a little ecosystem of its own, and given that many Python users are still not fully embracing typing, maybe continuing to tie the typing syntax to Python syntax is starting to strain.
I would really like to see either "Typed Python" become a different programming language, or progress to building type checking into the CPython implementation itself. (Python 4 seems to me the obvious release.) The current halfway approach is confusing and slightly ridiculous.
Please don't denigrate the hard work people have put in to even bring forward the idea of typing in Python by saying it's "slightly ridiculous".
-Brett
Aren't people allowed to have their own opinions? Please, I hate to see this list descend further and further into such knee-jerk reactions. If criticism of any current implementation of any construct becomes off-limits is automatically classed as "denigrating", there is no reason for this list to exist. You might not agreed with the criticism, but you should at least be open to discussion.