[Python-Dev] PEP 484: updates to Python 2.7 signature syntax
Andrew Barnert
abarnert at yahoo.com
Sat Mar 19 21:43:32 EDT 2016
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Sat Mar 19 21:43:32 EDT 2016
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 484: updates to Python 2.7 signature syntax
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 484: updates to Python 2.7 signature syntax
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mar 19, 2016, at 18:18, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote: > > Second, https://github.com/python/typing/issues/186. This builds on > the previous syntax but deals with the other annoyance of long > argument lists, this time in case you *do* care about the types. The > proposal is to allow writing the arguments one per line with a type > comment on each line. This has been implemented in PyCharm but not yet > in mypy. Example: > > def gcd( > a, # type: int > b, # type: int > ): > # type: (...) -> int > <code here> This is a lot nicer than what you were originally discussing (at #1101? I forget...). Even more so given how trivial it will be to mechanically convert these to annotations if/when you switch an app to pure Python 3. But one thing: in the PEP and the docs, I think it would be better to pick an example with longer parameter names. This example shows that even in the worst case it isn't that bad, but a better example would show that in the typical case it's actually pretty nice. (Also, I don't see why you wouldn't just use the "old" comment form for this example, since it all fits on one line and isn't at all confusing.)
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 484: updates to Python 2.7 signature syntax
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 484: updates to Python 2.7 signature syntax
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list