[Types-sig] RE: [meta-sig] The Types-SIG is comatose. Let's retire it.

[Martijn Faassen]

Jim Fulton wrote:
> 
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
> >
> > Paul Prescod wrote:
> > >
> > > > taking-no-more-from-this-than-that-a-successful-sig-needs-a-
> > > >     focused-charter-ly y'rs  - tim
> > >
> > > I propose that the types sig be re-commissioned with a much tighter
> > > commission. Let's focus on ONE of the three problems listed in our old
> > > charter:
> > >
> > > http://www.python.org/sigs/types-sig/
> 
> I really agree with this.

But I suppose you disagree with Paul on what this focus problem should
be? You'd prefer interfaces, right? Or seeing what you said later on in
your post, perhaps an interface-SIG? I expect I'd contribute to any
discussion of interfaces *or* static types. I'd probably be able to
contribute more of practical value to any interface development right
now. I don't have so much to contribute about the class/type dichotomy.

> > > And let's start with a clear direction from the Powers that Be.
> > >
> > > I propose:
> > >
> > >  * the goal is a optional static type system for version 2.
> >
> > Okay, I'll assume this goal for now. I'd like to see something happen
> > with interfaces too, but I'll just assume/hope that an interface
> > proposal will arise 'naturally' from any static type system we come up
> > with.
> 
> I intend to summarize the interfaces discussion and report back.

That'd be really helpful.

> I also intend to go ahead and release the interface implementation
> based on requirements that we agreed to at Spam7 and mostly agreed to
> in the SIG.

That'd be even more helpful.

> We'll also start folding it into Zope.

And that'd be wonderful! I am starting to feel that need after getting
lost in the Zope sources too often. I'd like to contribute; perhaps by
documenting something for starters. Any ideas?

> Based on actual
> experience using it, we'll have a basis for future discussions.

So practical.! :) I'd like to get in on this early on. I assume I'll
catch your announcement on the release of the interface implementation,
but I'd also be very interested to follow the process of rolling it into
Zope from the start. Not that I'm likely to be able to contribute much
at the start, but it just sounds really interesting to me. Any idea on
how this could be accomplished?

> I desperately hope these future discussions happen somewhere other than
> the reinvented types sig.

The interfaces-SIG? :)

[snip class/type discussion]
 
[lots on static typing]
> (snip, I don't really care that much about static typing, except that
>  I'm generally wary of it. ;)

*grin* Okay, I suggest another design goal for the revived types-SIG:
'Pass the Fulton Test'. We must strive for a static type system so
wonderful that even Jim Fulton will like it. :)
 
Regards,

Martijn