On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 12:26:58AM +0300, Koos Zevenhoven wrote: > On Friday, while replying to a post on python-dev about PEP 526 > (variable annotations), I ended up mentioning things that I think a > good type checker should do, which seem to differ from the general > understanding. The discussion should continue here, though, because > the aim of PEP 526 is not to define type-checking semantics.
Why should it continue here? The semantics of a type-checker is not part of Python the language. This is "python-ideas", not "third-party- application-ideas". If this thread belongs anywhere, it is probably the code quality mailing list. It is very likely that different linters and type-checkers will take different approaches. Some may infer more, some may infer less, and that's a good thing. Before arguing what a type-checker should or shouldn't do, perhaps we ought to look at what MyPy, PyLint, PyChecker, PyFlakes and Jedi already do. (Apologies if I have missed anyone's favourite linter/checker.) We should not try to specify the behaviour of the type-checker. Let the type-checkers compete in the wider Python eco-system and converge to best practice as found by experience, not because we declare by fiat that Thou Shalt Do It This Way. -- Steve _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
