On 20 March 2017 at 19:07, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote: > I'm overall very supportive of seeing something like this make it into > Python to further strengthen duck typing in the language. > Thanks! > Personally, I think even an abstract method should be properly typed. > [SNIP] > or raise NotImplementedError. > Yes, I think this is a reasonable requirement. (Also assuming unconditional raise is a bottom type, raising body is properly typed). Initially I thought a type checker could warn about invalid calls to super(), but this complicates things, and indeed "explicit is better than implicit". -- Ivan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20170320/34f824b1/attachment.html>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4