RetroSearch Browse

Fri Nov 10 01:42:36 EST 2017 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-November/150445.html

I didn't follow the discussion on the PEP but I was surprised to read "from
__future__ import annotations" in an example. Annotations exist since
Python 3.0, why would Python 3.7 require a future for them? Well, I was
aware of the PEP, but I was confused anyway.

I really prefer "from __future__ import string_annotations" !

Victor

Le 10 nov. 2017 03:14, "Nick Coghlan" <ncoghlan at gmail.com> a écrit :

> On 10 November 2017 at 05:51, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> > If we have to change the name I'd vote for string_annotations -- "lazy"
> has
> > too many other connotations (e.g. it might cause people to think it's the
> > thunks). I find str_annotations too abbreviated, and
> stringify_annotations
> > is too hard to spell.
>
> Aye, I'd be fine with "from __future__ import string_annotations" -
> that's even more explicitly self-documenting than either of my
> suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> Nick.
>
> --
> Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/
> victor.stinner%40gmail.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20171110/6d90517e/attachment-0001.html>

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-November/150445.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 563: Postponed Evaluation of Annotations