On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Chris Barker <chris.barker@noaa.gov> wrote:

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:

They can, and they @override can be bypassed. I don't see that as a condemnation of @overload -- it just means that it's not perfect, which is fine with me (given that we're talking about monkey-patching here).

sure -- but this all strikes me as kind of like type checking -- there is a lot of use for robust code, but we don't want it at run-time in the language.

Also -- the ship has kinda sailed on this - maybe a @not_override would make more sense.

Isn't the goal to make sure you don't accidentally override a method? saying "I know I'm overriding this" is less useful than "I'm not intending to override anything here"

I think you're fighting a straw man. I never said @override should be added to the language. I said that it would be useful to have a 3rd party metaclass or a class decorator that implements it which packages may voluntarily use to constrain their subclasses (or their own uses -- different designs are possible).

--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)