On Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 9:24:01 PM UTC-6, Rustom Mody wrote: > > ============================================================ > > Simplistic Example Code utilizing two files: > > ============================================================ > > > > [...snip code example...] > > > 1. Allow in same file > 2. Change syntax slightly to: > type greeting : str -> str
While i'll agree that removing the hints from sigs is better than the alternative of injecting noise into sigs, i still feel as though type hints will "dirty" the purity of source no matter how wonderful the declaration might to be. I believe strongly that LOD is the only method we can apply that will allow us to "bolt on" non-destructive type hints in Python. So although your idea is an improvement, i'm sticking with the "stub file solution". (unless something better is offered) > [type is the keyword equivalent to your other typehint file ] > and you have essentially the Haskell solution. > > The catch I expect is that haskell is strongly committed to simultaneous > definitions: > > x = 1 > y = x+2 > > is the same as > y = x+2 > x = 1 > > and so definitions can generally be permuted around > > Python is committed to the opposite extreme: > even def and class are not declarative but imperative I'm sorry, but i was unable to understand how your last point was relevant to type hints? -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list