[Python-Dev] Second post: PEP 557, Data Classes
Eric V. Smith
eric at trueblade.com
Mon Nov 27 08:02:11 EST 2017
On 11/27/2017 7:26 AM, Sebastian Rittau wrote:
> On 27.11.2017 12:01, Sebastian Rittau wrote:
>>
>>> The major changes from the previous version are:
>>>
>>> - Add InitVar to specify initialize-only fields.
>>
>> This is the only feature that does not sit right with me. It looks
>> very obscure and "hacky". From what I understand, we are supposed to
>> use the field syntax to define constructor arguments. I'd argue that
>> the name "initialize-only fields" is a misnomer, which only hides the
>> fact that this has nothing to do with fields at all. Couldn't
>> dataclassses just pass *args and **kwargs to __post_init__()? Type
>> checkers need to be special-cases for InitVar anyway, couldn't they
>> instead be special cased to look at __post_init__ argument types?
> I am sorry for the double post, but I thought a bit more about why this
> does not right with me:
>
> * As written above, InitVars look like fields, but aren't.
Same as with ClassVars, which is where the inspiration came from.
> * InitVar goes against the established way to pass through arguments,
> *args and **kwargs. While type checking those is an unsolved
> problem, from what I understand, I don't think we should introduce a
> second way just for dataclasses.
> * InitVars look like a way to satisfy the type checker without
> providing any benefit to the programmer. Even when I'm not
> interested in type checking, I have to declare init vars.
Same as with ClassVars, if you're using them. And that's not just a
dataclasses thing, although dataclasses is the first place I know of
where it would change the code semantics.
> * InitVars force me to repeat myself. I have the InitVar declaration
> and then I have the repeat myself in the signature of
> __post_init__(). This has all the usual problems of repeated code.
There was some discussion about this starting at
https://github.com/ericvsmith/dataclasses/issues/17#issuecomment-345529717,
in particular a few messages down where we discussed what would be
repeated, and what mypy would be able to deduce. You won't need to
repeat the type declaration.
> I hope I did not misunderstood the purpose of InitVar.
I think you understand it perfectly well, especially with the "context"
discussion. Thanks for bringing it up.
Eric.
More information about the Python-Dev
mailing list