[Python-Dev] PEP 563: Postponed Evaluation of Annotations

[Koos Zevenhoven]

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
>> > 'string_annotations' 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
  ​
-- 
+ Koos Zevenhoven + http://twitter.com/k7hoven +
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20171112/f18f1f17/attachment.html>