Provide guidance on PEP 698's strict enforcement feature of typing.override
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 1.8k
- Forks
- 302
- Avg merge
- 23h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 8
Description
PEP 698 (typing.override) suggests that type-checkers provide a strict enforcement option that would mark method overrides. However, no guidance is provided about the methods __init__ and __new__. These methods are always implicit overrides (from object method). These method do not obey LSP (so their signature doesn't depend on any superclass), which means that override decoration only verifies that you haven't misspelled the method. Should they be exempt from this strict check?
(I'm not convinced one way or the other, but it would be nice to have some guidance on this.)
CC'ing @erictraut because we had a brief discussion about this.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reviewing PEP 698 and the issue's discussion of strict enforcement for typing.override. Determine whether init and new should be exempt, and document clear guidance for type-checker implementations and users once the policy is decided.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100