On 8/16/06, Paul Prescod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
On 8/16/06, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Sorry, I meant "restrict" as in having it stated that the annotations
are for typechecking, rather than attempting to support a dozen
different uses simultaneously. The annotations would still be
free-form, with the semantics up to whoever's implementing the
__typecheck__ function, and Python itself wouldn't take any steps to
enforce what can or can't go in the annotations.
Nobody every suggested that Python should take any steps to enforce what can or can't go in the annotations! It seems that we're inventing disagreement where there is none. All I ever suggested is a) that we put some guidelines in the spec *discouraging* people from using built-in Python types for their own private meanings without some kind of discriminator clarifying that they are doing so and b) that we define the shared meanings of a couple of useful types: lists and tuples. This leaves the Python development team the maximum latitude to specify the meanings for the other types (especially type type) later.
Paul Prescod
_______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
