On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 23:51:58 +0000 Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benja...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Not a PEP proponent (or even a typing user), but I thought this had > > been made clear long ago. My understanding is that optional, > > incremental type hints are and have always been considered the primary > > use case for annotations by the BDFL and AFAICT the SC following the > > BDFL. If compatibility with typing is an issue, then the burden of > > implementing that is on the other application. Typing *might* do > > something to help, but it's not obligated to do so. > > This was not my understanding of annotations when they were introduced e.g.: > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3107/#use-cases > > As I remember it, a decision about the purpose of annotations was > *explicitly* not made when they were introduced.
This is also what I remember from the discussions at the time of PEP 3107. Annotations were purposefully use case-agnostic, and there was no stated desire to push for one use case or another. I don't think gradual typing was even on the radar, not in public comments anyway. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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/DD2OTSIWZ3KMR6PDK3CSLOMDJQMQSUHL/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
