Ivan Levkivskyi levkivskyi at gmail.com
Sun May 28 09:19:03 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 ]

---

Thanks everyone for interesting suggestions!

@Antoine @Guido:
Some of the possible options for the title are:
* Protocols (structural subtyping)
* Protocols (static duck typing)
* Structural subtyping (static duck typing)
which one do you prefer?

@Nick:
Yes, explicit imports are not necessary for static type checkers (I will
add a short comment about this).

@Mark:
I agree with Guido on all points here. For example,
collections.abc.Iterable is already a class,
and lots of code uses isinstance(obj, collections.abc.Iterable) and similar
checks with other ABCs
(also in a structural manner, i.e. via __subclasshook__). So that disabling
this will case many breakages.
The question of whether typing.Iterable[int] should be a class is
independent (orthogonal) and
does not belong to this PEP.

--
Ivan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20170528/1685146e/attachment.html>

---

• 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