ns to avoid using Optional at all.
Related: The word on the street is that "T|None" is likely to be a
favored replacement for Optional in general going forward, since it's
faster to type and doesn't require an extra import (of Optional from
typing).
Best,
--
David Foster | Seattle,
ons, because it is easy to do so.
All of the preceding clarifications have been proposed in a PR:
https://github.com/python/peps/pull/2388
Best,
--
David Foster | Seattle, WA, USA
Contributor to Python's type system
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- p
r a reason.
Perhaps to improve performance? By removing the arena allocator are there
potential downsides other than a performance regression?
(11)
> Reference Implementation
> ''''
>
> None as yet.
Seems like you could get a prototype off the ground by implementing
Hi folks, PEP 655 (Required[] and NotRequired[] for TypedDict) is still
looking for feedback from core devs.
I've copied the latest PEP text at the bottom of this email to make it
easier to comment on.
Thank you for your time.
Best,
--
David Foster | Seattle, WA, USA
Contributor to Python's
rom python-dev the next step
would be to submit this PEP to the Steering Council. However it's not
clear to me from [2] where I should actually do that when the time comes.
--
David Foster | Seattle, WA, USA
Contributor to TypedDict support for mypy
[1]: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-06
location) who would be willing to give me a review?
[1]: https://github.com/python/peps
[2]: https://github.com/python/peps/blob/master/README.rst
[3]: https://github.com/python/pythondotorg/pull/1735
--
David Foster | Seattle, WA, USA
Contributor to TypedDict support for mypy
