I talked about this before but I have slightly different suggestions
list[type] becomes [type]
tuple[type1, type2, type3] becomes (type1, type2, type3)
dict[type1, type2] becomes {type1: type2}
set[type] becomes {type}
Callable[[type1], type2] becomes (type1) -> type2
class MyTypedDict(Typed
The generic collections in typing were deprecated in favor of the generic
collections in collections.abc. The objects and the types were exposed to
user code, and in the future they will not be
> We don't want there to be warnings about them
> forever
The new wanrings._deprecated
https://discuss
Steve Jorgensen wrote:
> Would we want something more general that could deal with cases where the
> input does not have a 1-to-1 mapping to the field that differ only, perhaps,
> in type hint? What if we want 1 argument to initializes 2 properties or vice
> verse, etc.?
That's definitely an imp
El jue, 30 jun 2022 a las 22:19, Stephen J. Turnbull (<
stephenjturnb...@gmail.com>) escribió:
> nveric...@gmail.com writes:
>
> > I accidentally created another thread in python-dev as I mentioned
> > above, but ideally Optional and Union should both be deprecated and
> > phased out for the ne
> BTW, I disagree with your arguments that Optional and Union are
> misleading names that can be easily misunderstood, especially in the
> usual context of formal arguments in function definitions.
The comment made by Jelle Zijlstra suggested to me suggested that the new
syntax might have been a
Dexter Hill wrote:
> Steve Jorgensen wrote:
> > Would we want something more general that could deal with cases where the
> > input does not have a 1-to-1 mapping to the field that differ only,
> > perhaps, in type hint? What if we want 1 argument to initializes 2
> > properties or vice verse, e
