[Python-Dev] PEP 563: Postponed Evaluation of Annotations (original) (raw)

Koos Zevenhoven k7hoven at gmail.com
Sun Nov 12 07:14:50 EST 2017

On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:

On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:

On 11 November 2017 at 01:48, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote: > I don't mind the long name. Of all the options so far I really only like > 'stringannotations' so let's go with that.

+1 from me. I'd like to reverse my stance on this. We had from _future_ import_ _division for many years in Python 2, and nobody argued that it implied that Python 2 doesn't have division -- it just meant to import the future version of division. So I think the original idea, from _future__ _import annotations is fine. I don't expect there will be other things related to annotations that we'll be importing from the future. Furthermore, ​nobody expects the majority of programmers to look at annotations either. But those who do need to care about the 'implementation detail' of whether it's a string won't be surprised to find nested strings like "'ForwardReferencedThing'". But one might fear that those cases get ruthlessly converted into being equivalent to just "ForwardReferencedThing".

So actually my question is: What should happen when the annotation is already a string literal?

-- Koos ​

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list