syntax difference

[Rick Johnson]

On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 6:43:36 AM UTC-5, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> The programmer can ignore [type-hints], just as they can
> ignore any other form of documentation.

Type-hints, as implemented, break all the rules of
conventional documentation. In any programming language i
have ever seen, formal documentation elements such as
documentation strings and comments do not _interleave_
themselves with executable code, no, they are forced to
isolate themselves on entire lines, or, the tail ends of
lines. For instance, i have never seem a dynamic programming
language that did anything like the following:

    def foo():
        for k<k is a string>,v<v is a integer> in d<d is a dict>:
            print<that is a built-in>(k, v)

Have you??? Maybe i'm crazy, but i would prefer to have my
_documentation_ and executable-code separated from one
another.

    def foo():
        # Iterate over the keys of d
        # k: string
        # v: integer
        # d: dict (duh!)
        for k,v in d:
            print(k, v) # That was builtin!
            
> Nobody is stopping you from writing:
> 
>     result = function(the_string=42.5)

Steven, that's an example of "self-documenting names" not
"documentation". I'm sorry, but you are terribly confused if
you cannot understand the non-subtle difference between
these two concepts.

> [we do it] Just to annoy you.

You're also terribly confused if you believe i'm the only
person in this community who is opposed to the current
implementation of type-hints. Remember, i'm not advocating
that type-hints be removed completely (the train has left
the station). I'm only requesting that one of the following
be done to _alleviate_ the burden of their poorly executed
implementation:

    (1) Re-implement type-hints as a comment. 
     
    (2) Provide a tool that will remove type-hints from scripts
        error free.

Is that _really_ too much to ask?