Python Sanity Proposal: Type Hinting Solution

Rick Johnson rantingrickjohnson at gmail.com
Fri Jan 23 20:48:30 CET 2015


On Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 10:04:29 PM UTC-6, Chris Angelico wrote:

> It's worth pointing out, too, that the idea isn't
> panaceaic - it's just another tool in the box. Any time
> you break related things into separate places, especially
> separate files, the tendency for them to get out of sync
> grows dramatically.

I wonder how that "poor python interpreter" keeps all those
.pyc and .pyo files in sync with constantly changing source
code? It should be tantamount to torture! Will someone
*PLEASE* start a charity site titled: "Python's sanity fund"?

> Use of stub files for something that's only occasionally
> run (the type-checking linter) increases the potential
> time delay between the error and the fix. Unless you make
> a git/hg hook that runs type checks, chances are you'll
> have those issues in your code.
> 
> Stub files are useful, but they aren't going to magically
> solve everyone's complaints.

We're not trying to solve everyone's complaints, we're
trying to formulate a solution that will cause the least
amount (or completely avert) violating Python's design
philosophy. You act as if the "type hint fan-boys" are the
*ONLY* side of this coin, well, i here to inform you that
coins are two-sided!

Even though type hints may be useful to many programmers,
i'm sure equally as many will find no use for them. But
emotion and opinions *ALONE* is not a wise basis for ANY
decision making.

Therefore, the "MANDATORY-STUB-FILE-SOLUTION" is the *ONLY*
solution (offered so far) that can maintain Python's
philosophical goals whilst appeasing both sides of this two
faced coin.




More information about the Python-list mailing list