[Python-3000] Conventions for annotation consumers (was: Re: Draft pre-PEP: function annotations) (original) (raw)

Collin Winter collinw at gmail.com
Tue Aug 15 20:28:24 CEST 2006

On 8/15/06, Paul Prescod <paul at prescod.net> wrote:

On 8/15/06, Collin Winter <collinw at gmail.com> wrote: > Extending this same idea to static analysis tools, tools like > pychecker or an optimising compiler would have to supply their own > such wrapper classes. This would be a huge burden, not just on the > authors of such tools, but also on those wishing to use these tools.

No, this is incorrect. Metadata is just metadata. Libraries act on metadata. There is a many to many relationship. You could go and define Collin's type metadata syntax. You create a library of wrappers (really you need only ONE wrapper). Then you could convince the writers of PyPy to use the same syntax. So there would be one set of annotations used by two libraries.

If multiple libraries use the same wrappers, then I can't use more than one of these libraries at the same time. If a typechecking consumer, a docstring consumer and PyPy all use the same wrapper (or "syntax" -- you switch terms between sentences), then I can't have typechecking and docstrings on the same functions, and I can't do either if I'm running my program with PyPy.

Collin Winter

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list