[Python-Dev] PEP 544: Protocols - second round
Mark Shannon
mark at hotpy.org
Thu May 25 13:49:33 EDT 2017
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Thu May 25 13:49:33 EDT 2017
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 544: Protocols - second round
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 544: Protocols - second round
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 24/05/17 14:31, Ivan Levkivskyi wrote: > Hi all, > > After collecting suggestions in the previous discussion on python-dev > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-March/thread.html#147629 > and playing with implementation, here is an updated version of PEP 544. > > -- > Ivan I really like this PEP in general. I think this brings the type system for type-hints closer to Python semantics. But there are a few points I disagree with. I don't think Protocol types should be tied to ABCs. It just makes things more complex with no obvious benefit. I also think all references to 'isinstance' and 'issubclass' should be removed. Type-hints should not have runtime semantics, beyond those that they have as classes. In fact, there is no need for protocol types to be classes at all. Cheers, Mark.
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 544: Protocols - second round
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 544: Protocols - second round
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list