Provide guidance on PEP 698's strict enforcement feature of typing.override
还没有人认领这个 Issue。
- 主要语言
- Python
- 星标
- 1.8k
- 派生
- 302
- 平均合并
- 23 小时
- 30 天内合并 PR
- 8
描述
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.
贡献指南
这个仓库没有索引到贡献指南
从这里开始
- 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
- 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
- Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
- 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。
调研方向
首先审阅 PEP 698 以及 issue 中关于严格执行 typing.override 的讨论。确定是否应豁免 init 和 new,并在政策确定后,为类型检查器实现和用户记录明确的指导方针。
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
评估
- 技术栈
- python
- 领域
- documentation
- Issue 类型
- 文档
- 难度
- 5/5
- 预计耗时
- 一周以上
- 活跃度
- 停滞
- 描述清晰度
- 基本清楚
- 新手友好度
- 30/100