> On 10 Nov, 2017, at 4:48 PM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 1:20 AM, Lukasz Langa <luk...@langa.pl > <mailto:luk...@langa.pl>> wrote: > Alright, we're on bikeshed territory now. Finally! :-) > > I was always thinking about this as "static annotations". The fact they're > strings at runtime is irrelevant for most people who will use this future. > They don't want string annotations, they want them to not be evaluated on > import time... they want them to be static. Also, "static typing" et al. I > think it has a nice vibe to it. > > I admit "annotations" is too broad but "static_annotations" (or > "string_annotations" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ) will be the longest __future__ name so far. > That was my main motivation behind using the shorter name. And a bit of > megalomania I guess. > > I don't mind the long name. Of all the options so far I really only like > 'string_annotations' so let's go with that.
Done. - Ł
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ 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
