On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 08:04:44AM -0700, Christopher Barker wrote:
On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 6:08 AM Franklin? Lee
wrote: The proposed feature is for expressing type relations, which only matters when you care about types. The feature will only be useful when you care about types. The syntax will only help/hurt readability when the code cares about types.
And Python programmers rarely care about types -- that's why we use Python.d
I'm pretty sure that Python programmers *frequently* care about types. I know I do. How else do you avoid TypeErrors and AttributeErrors, if you don't care what type of data you're using? What they might not be doing is *explicitly* type-checking using isinstance or issubclass, but that doesn't mean they don't care about types. Whether we duck-type, or LBYL with an explicit test, or EAPF with a try...except block, or just rely on the caller never passing the wrong thing to our functions, we still care about types. -- Steven