Greg Ewing wrote: >> Guido's original proposal called for __typecheck__(arg, type) to >> be called on each argument that has a type declaration, with the >> result replacing the argument value. >> >> Given this definition for the semantics, none of the issues you >> raised are relevant. > > I think some of it is still relevant, such as the concern > about different parts of the same program fighting over > the interpretation of the type annotations. > > I'm rather leery about the whole thing myself because of > that. The idea of adding something in such a fundamental > and intrusive way to the language when we don't even > have a clear idea of what we're going to use it for > smells very bad to me.
Another thing I totally don't understand is how type annotations without any semantic assigned to them can be used to help speeding up Python and its compiler/interpreter. I thought (and hoped) that was one of the main scopes of type annotations. -- Giovanni Bajo _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
