On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 9:41 PM Paul Bryan <pbr...@anode.ca> 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 -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/M4AMAFV6SRQGOYC5JUO55VGEELNJTJFU/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
