> > So if you hate type annotations because they are unreadable, then you > hate Python because Python is unreadable. >
That seems rather harsh. I suspect if those of us who are uncomfortable with the typing subsystem actually hated Python we would have found our way to the exits long ago. Typing was always supposed to be optional, so I didn't worry too much about it at the time. As Jack indicated though, while it may be optional at the language level, it's often not truly optional at the organizational level. As you indicated, there are two things going on, Python syntax and the semantics which go along with it. Python's economical syntax is a terrific reflection of its runtime semantics, hence the use of the phrase "executable pseudocode" to describe Python (at least in the past). Just because you are using Python syntax for your declarations doesn't mean that (a) mapping the semantics of the desired declarations onto existing syntax will be straightforward or (b) that the semantics of those declarations will be reflected as effortlessly as it reflects runtime semantics. Skip
_______________________________________________ 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/RSFLXNJIXM7TSIQS5GS3UOJCU7P2ULIU/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
