[Python-ideas] Structural type checking for PEP 484

Sven R. Kunze srkunze at mail.de
Thu Sep 10 00:02:43 CEST 2015

Not specifically about this proposal but about the effort put into 
Python typehinting in general currently:

What are the supposed benefits?

I somewhere read that right now tools are able to infer 60% of the 
types. That seems pretty good to me and a lot of effort on your side to 
make some additional 20?/30? %. Don't get me wrong, I like the 
theoretical and abstract discussions around this topic but I feel this 
type of feature way out of the practical realm.

I don't see the effort for adding type hints AND the effort for further 
parsing (by human eyes) justified by partially better IDE support and 1 
single additional test within test suites of about 10,000s of tests.

Especially, when considering that correct types don't prove 
functionality in any case. But tested functionality in some way proves 
correct typing.

Just my two cents since I felt I had to say this and maybe I am missing 
something. :)


On 09.09.2015 22:17, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Jukka wrote up a proposal for structural subtyping. It's pretty good. 
> Please discuss.
> https://github.com/ambv/typehinting/issues/11#issuecomment-138133867
> -- 
> --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido <http://python.org/%7Eguido>)
> _______________________________________________
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20150910/a2e9630f/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-ideas mailing list