[Python-ideas] Terminology of types / typing [was: PEP 560 (second post)]

Ivan Levkivskyi levkivskyi at gmail.com
Wed Nov 15 13:41:02 EST 2017


At some point it was proposed to distinguish two things: types (static) and
classes (runtime).
I don't think we need more fine grained terminology here.

--
Ivan



On 15 November 2017 at 17:54, Koos Zevenhoven <k7hoven at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Koos Zevenhoven <k7hoven at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> [..]
>
>> What do we call such a "type"? Maybe we have both "concrete" and
>> "strictly concrete" types. Perhaps we also have both "abstract" and
>> "strictly abstract" types. An ABC with some concrete default
>> implementations might then be both a concrete type and an abstract type.
>>
>> Note that in the above bullet point "definition" of concrete type, I
>> intentionally left out the requirement that the type can be instantiated.
>>
>> The other two bullet points are:
>>
>> * strictly concrete type: a concrete type that is not abstract––it
>> concretely implements everything that it represents / describes. This is
>> almost always a normal class, so it might be also known as "class".
>>
>> * strictly abstract type: an abstract type that is not concrete––it does
>> not implement any functionality or storage.
>>
>> ​There might be a way to improve terminology from this, but I feel that
>> what I sketched here is usable but still not very ambiguous.
>>
>>
> ​Let me rephrase that last sentence: I think this terminology is more
> clear.
>
> And here's some additional clarification:
>
> I expect that the possibility of a type being both concrete and abstract
> may sound strange. In some ways it is indeed strange, but this overlap of
> concepts definitely exists already, we just need to categorize and define
> the concepts clearly, but without introducing too many concepts whose
> relations to each other are messy.
>
> This might also seem strange if you are not used to how "strict" is often
> used in mathematics and related sciences. Essentially, it's synonymous to
> "proper"​. For example,  "strict subset" and "proper subset" of a set both
> refer to a subset that is not the set itself. Any set is both a superset
> and subset of itself (in non-strict terms).  Also "pure" might sometimes
> refer to something similar.
>
> So in some sense it means excluding the "gray area". Often that "gray
> area" is kept part of the non-strict/improper concept for convenience.
>> ––Koos
>>
> --
> + Koos Zevenhoven + http://twitter.com/k7hoven +
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171115/55e982b2/attachment.html>


More information about the Python-ideas mailing list