Optional Static Typing: Part II
mike at hobbshouse.org
Tue Jan 4 23:13:45 CET 2005
John Roth <newsgroups at jhrothjr.com> wrote:
> Now, the base objective seems to be to incorporate PyChecker
> functionality into the root. This in turn requires type inference,
> which in turn strongly suggests type annotations to help the
> inferencer out over rough spots.
> I like this approach a lot.
If he makes the type inferencer "proud", that might help alleviate
the fears around here that it will become standard practice to put
type annotations on everything. That is, if you explicitly annotate
a function in the same way that the inferencer would have inferenced
it, the PyChecker thingie would emit a message saying:
"I'm no dummy! I could have told you that foo() takes an 'int' and
returns a 'bool'. What do you think I am, stupid? Duuu-uhhh!"
More information about the Python-list