[Python-Dev] PEP 563: Postponed Evaluation of Annotations

Koos Zevenhoven k7hoven at gmail.com
Fri Nov 10 10:04:17 EST 2017

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 9:51 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:

> If we have to change the name I'd vote for string_annotations -- "lazy"
> has too many other connotations (e.g. it might cause people to think it's
> the thunks). I find str_annotations too abbreviated, and
> stringify_annotations is too hard to spell.
​I can't say I disagree. ​And maybe importing string_annotations from the
__future__ doesn't sound quite as sad as importing something from the

Anyway, it's not obvious to me that it is the module author that should
decide how the annotations are handled. See also this quote below:

(Quoted from the end of
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2017-October/047311.html )

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Koos Zevenhoven <k7hoven at gmail.com> wrote:

> ​​[*] Maybe somehow make the existing functionality a phantom easter
> egg––a blast from the past which you can import and use, but which is
> otherwise invisible :-). Then later give warnings and finally remove it
> completely.
> But we need better smooth upgrade paths anyway, maybe something like:
> from __compat__ import unintuitive_decimal_contexts
> with unintuitive_decimal_contexts:
>     do_stuff()
> ​Now code bases can more quickly switch to new python versions and make
> the occasional compatibility adjustments more lazily, while already
> benefiting from other new language features.
> ––Koos​
+ Koos Zevenhoven + http://twitter.com/k7hoven +
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20171110/6d662a84/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list