On Apr 21, 2015, at 01:34 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >Putting the type information in a stub file is an exponentially more distant >fourth best, or to put it another way, *the worst* solution for where to put >type hints. Not only do you Repeat Yourself with the name of the parameter, >but also the name of the function (or method and class) AND module. The type >information *isn't even in the same file*, which increases the chance of it >being lost, forgotten, deleted, out of date, unmaintained, etc.
All true, but the trade-off is the agility and ease of working on, reading, and understanding the stdlib, all of which IMHO will suffer if type hints are inlined there. What I don't want to have happen is for type hints to slowly infiltrate the stdlib to the point where no patch will be accepted unless it also has hints. I have the same gut reaction to this as RDM expressed a few posts back. One of the thing I love most about Python is its dynamic typing. I'm all for giving linter developers a hook for experimenting with their tools, I just don't care and I don't want to *have* to care. Maybe some day they will make it so compelling that I will care, but I want to be convinced first. So I think stub files in the stdlib are the right compromise today. Cheers, -Barry _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com