On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 09:36:20PM -0700, Christopher Barker wrote: > On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 5:24 PM Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > > > Runtime type checkers already have to deal with forward refs that are > > strings, as this is legal, and always will be: > > > > def function(arg:'Spam') -> Any: ... > > > > so we're not putting any extra burden on them. And we had already > > agreed to implicitly use strings for annotations. > > > > I'll take your word for it. However, other runtime uses for annotations may > not already need to support strings as types. > > Pydantic is the classic example.
Pydantic supports stringified annotations. https://pydantic-docs.helpmanual.io/usage/postponed_annotations/ Any other runtime annotation tool has to support strings, otherwise the "from __future__ import annotations" directive will have already broken it. If the tool does type-checking, then it should support stringified annotations. They have been a standard part of type-hinting since 2014 and Python 3.5: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/#forward-references Any type-checking tool which does not already support stringified references right now is broken. -- Steve _______________________________________________ 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/WVVBETE7UZ4WI6HOF7WCNHYOK6HCXRTA/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
