Guido: > It seems a little disingenuous to claim discussions about annotations don’t > concern you when you’re actively using them (for typing, no less, in the > case of pydantic). And I am sure a project as popular (by their own > description) as pydantic will find a way forward if PEP 649 is rejected, > despite overdramatized claims.
I also maintain a library that uses type annotations in a runtime context (cattrs), but in a slightly different way than Pydantic. My project is much less popular than Pydantic (to be expected, since it only deals with de/serialization and the class definition layer is attrs/dataclasses), and the first issue filed on my bug tracker about future annotations was created at the end of 2019, so that's when I started thinking about it. To be honest, supporting stringified annotations was a lot of work to do in an efficient way (and that's the main reason cattrs has two converter classes now), but there was plenty of time and I simply did the work. The new design is even faster than the old one.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/KER3PFQO2MV3LAWI2JHIANT7UVVT6KT5/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
