[Python-ideas] Structural type checking for PEP 484
Matthias Kramm
kramm at google.com
Thu Sep 10 20:57:21 CEST 2015
On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 at 1:19:12 PM UTC-7, 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
>
I like this proposal; given Python's flat nominal type hierarchy, it will
be useful to have a parallel subtyping mechanism to give things finer
granularity without having to resort to ABCs.
Are the return types of methods invariant or variant under this proposal?
I.e. if I have
class A(Protocol):
def f() -> int: ...
does
class B:
def f() -> bool:
return True
implicitly implement the protocol A?
Also, marking Protocols using subclassing seems confusing and error-prone.
In your examples above, one would think that you could define a new
protocol using
class SizedAndClosable(Sized):
pass
instead of
class SizedAndClosable(Sized, Protocol):
pass
because Sized is already a protocol.
Maybe the below would be a more intuitive syntax:
@protocol
class SizedAndClosable(Sized):
pass
Furthermore, I strongly agree with #7. Typed, but optional, attributes are
a bad idea.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20150910/2a9face3/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Python-ideas
mailing list