On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 9:35 PM Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 09:30:06AM -0700, aleksiy123 wrote:
Currently there are a few Protocols https://docs.python.org/3/library/typing.html#protocols defined in the typing module. One that I recently felt like was missing was a typing annotation for classes with a __str__() method defined. Seems like a fairly straightforward implementation.
Why do you care specifically about the `__str__` dunder? Calling str() is one of those protocols that should always succeed, whether the argument defines `__str__`, `__repr__`, or inherits from object.
Ignoring the possibility of bugs or deliberate raising, I can't think of any object that doesn't support the str() protocol. Have I missed anything?
-- Steve
I was also finding this desire a little puzzling (and thought it might just be my inexperience). And since both `type` and `object` have a __str__ method*, it seems like the only way any object could NOT support the str() protocol would be to write a __str__ method and deliberately bust it. Right? Is there even a way to create a python object that does not have `__str__` in the MRO? Seeing as that is the case, and seeing as how the protocol system can't look inside your __str__ method to find out whether it is busted at type checking time, isn't `Any` all you'll ever need to type-hint the __str__ protocol? * and upon checking in fact it is the same __str__ method --- Ricky. "I've never met a Kentucky man who wasn't either thinking about going home or actually going home." - Happy Chandler