Make support for type comments optional
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 484 (and therefore the current typing spec) implies that type checkers must support the old "type comment" syntax. However, this syntax is unnecessary since Python 3.6 and PEP 526, so there is little reason for new type checkers to support it.
I think we should no longer make support for type comments mandatory. We can keep describing the intended semantics of type comments, but say that type checkers are free to drop support for them. Code that is intended to work across type checkers (e.g., library stubs) should not use them.
PEP 484 (and therefore this spec) imply that type checkers must support the old "type comment" syntax. However, this syntax is unnecessary since Python 3.6 and PEP 526, so there is little reason for new type checkers to support it.
I think we should no longer make support for type comments mandatory. We can keep describing the intended semantics of type comments, but say that type checkers are free to drop support for them. Code that is intended to work across type checkers (e.g., library stubs) should not use them.
(Note that this does not include # type: ignore comments. Those are still useful and should continue to work.)
This isn't urgent so I'll likely not pursue this very soon, but I'm filing this issue to keep track of the idea. I previously filed JelleZijlstra/typing-spec#1, where one person spoke up because they still like type comments, but I'm planning to archive that repo.
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
阅读 typing 规范中关于类型注释的处理方式,并结合 PEP 484 和 PEP 526 进行查看,然后审阅之前的 JelleZijlstra/typing-spec#1 讨论。完成的标准是:规范允许类型检查器省略对普通类型注释的支持,同时保留对 # type: ignore 注释的要求,并说明兼容性指南。
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
- 35/100