Alternative syntax for Callable type-hinting
Hello, The idea here is to use the same operator already used to type-hint the return of functions `->` to define the return of a Callable. * Current syntax: Callable[[ArgumentList], ReturnType] eg. def x(method: Callable[[int, dict], None]) -> None: pass * Proposed syntax: Callable[ArgumentList] -> ReturnType eg. def x(method: Callable[int, dict] -> None) -> None: pass Do you think this is more intuitive? Is it viable? Kind regards, Thiago
On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 05:42 Thiago Carvalho D' Ávila < thiagocavila@gmail.com> wrote:
Why not just ‘(int, dict) -> None’? Do you think this is more intuitive? Is it viable?
Definitively more intuitive. With the new PEG parser it *may* be viable. However it may make it harder in the future to introduce ‘(x, y) -> x+y’ as a shorthand for lambda, which has also been proposed. I wouldn’t rush anything. —Guido -- --Guido (mobile)
On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 05:42 Thiago Carvalho D' Ávila < thiagocavila@gmail.com> wrote:
Why not just ‘(int, dict) -> None’? Do you think this is more intuitive? Is it viable?
Definitively more intuitive. With the new PEG parser it *may* be viable. However it may make it harder in the future to introduce ‘(x, y) -> x+y’ as a shorthand for lambda, which has also been proposed. I wouldn’t rush anything. —Guido -- --Guido (mobile)
participants (2)
-
Guido van Rossum -
Thiago Carvalho D' Ávila