On 10 May 2017 at 08:51, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 May 2017 at 11:11 Carl Meyer <c...@oddbird.net> wrote:
>> It might be nice to have a less verbose syntax for Optional, but that
>> can be a separate discussion.
>
> You should be able to do that today with `from typing import Optional as Eh`
> or whatever your preferred optional/maybe name is. :)
While "from typing import Optional as Opt" can indeed help, perhaps
PEP 505 should be updated to discuss this point in addition to the
current proposals for None-aware binary operators?
If it included a ? prefix operator as a shorthand for
"typing.Optional[<expr>]", that would shorten affected declarations
back to:
def handle_employee(e: ?Employee = None) -> None: ...
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
