On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 9:41 PM Paul Bryan <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm in favour of the approach proposed in PEP 649. > > Movie trailer: "In a world where annotations are arbitrary non-Python > syntax..." > > It seems to me we could always have annotations evaluate to Python > expressions **and* *support any arbitrary syntax (e.g. through > Annotated[...] or similar mechanism). What would a relaxed inline syntax > provide that a well-placed Annotated[type, ArbitraryNonPythonSyntax("...")] > annotation wouldn't? . >
I'm not a fan of Annotated -- it's an escape hook of last resort, not the way to add new syntax in the future. New syntax should enhance usability and readability, and Annotated does neither. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) *Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)* <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/M4AMAFV6SRQGOYC5JUO55VGEELNJTJFU/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
