[Python-ideas] PEP 484 (Type Hints) -- first draft round
jeanpierreda at gmail.com
Mon Jan 19 21:30:46 CET 2015
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Greg <greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
> On 19/01/2015 8:34 a.m., Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> I'm putting a line in the sand: annotations are
>> for types
> Do you mean *static* types, or types in general?
> If they're only for static type checking, this seems a waste of a
> facility that evaluates things at run time. Moreover, evaluating
> them at run time is actually counterproductive, since it makes
> dealing with things like forward references unnecessarily awkward.
> It also introduces useless runtime overhead. And they only address
> part of the problem, since they only apply to functions and not
> other things we might want to specify the type of.
Strong +1. The current proposal is a historical accident, it would not
be designed this way if it was designed from scratch. That's not a
nice thing to include in the core language. (Although it does happen
often, since "practicality beats purity").
I like the :: idea.
More information about the Python-ideas