On 23 September 2016 at 20:31, אלעזר <elaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 6:24 AM Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> It's not a substitute for something like click or argparse when it >> comes to more complex argument parsing, but it's a good example of the >> kind of simple pseudo-DSL folks have long been able to create with >> annotations independently of the type hinting use case. >> > > That's a very nice use, and I was wrong - I did know it; I've found it not > long ago when I wanted to implement it myself... > > And guess what? It does not require eager evaluation _at all_. No > decorator-helped-annotation mechanism require eager evaluation built into > the language. Lazy evaluation is more general than eager, in that it can > always be forced (and not the other way around).
The problem it poses for your proposal isn't that a library like begins couldn't be updated to work with lazy annotations (as you say, it clearly could be), it's that it demonstrates the idea of switching to lazy annotations involves a language level *compatibility break* for a feature that has been around and in use for almost 8 years now, and those need incredibly strong justifications. While I personally have some sympathy for the perspective that using strings for forward references in type hints feels a bit clunky, it still doesn't come close to reaching that deliberately high bar. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/