Jelle Zijlstra wrote: > > I like this too. A practical issue is that list[(a, b)] and list[a, b] look > the same to the compiler, but they would mean very different things. It's > not obvious how to fix this in a backward-compatible way. > > I think it looks much cleaner, and if there isn't any drawbacks to adding > > this syntax, I'd love to work on bringing this to life.
Restricting it to only the top level of a return type annotation should do the trick! Such that: def f() -> (X, Y, Z): ... is interpreted as tuple[X, Y, Z], but: def f(x: (X, Y, Z)) -> None: ... def f() -> Union[int, (X, Y, Z)]: ... def f() -> list[(X, Y, Z)]: ... Are not considered as tuple[...] _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/GDTLCSBIGY7W6GNWHUMRGY7KKFDKT3LU/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
