From mcarans at yahoo.co.uk Thu Dec 15 10:45:40 2016 From: mcarans at yahoo.co.uk (Michael Rans) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 15:45:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Python-porting] Function annotation syntax for 2.7/3.5 compatibility and pasteurize References: <1989457548.6150811.1481816740700.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1989457548.6150811.1481816740700@mail.yahoo.com> Hi, Which is the correct way of doing function annotations that work in 2.7 and 3.5?https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/#suggested-syntax-for-python-2-7-and-straddling-codeor http://python-future.org/func_annotations.html#func-annotations ? I have a feature request for pasteurize from Python Future - that it automatically convert Python 3.5 style function annotations to whatever is the correct format for 2.7. Is that possible? Thanks for all the good work! Cheers,Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brett at python.org Fri Dec 23 11:17:31 2016 From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 16:17:31 +0000 Subject: [Python-porting] Function annotation syntax for 2.7/3.5 compatibility and pasteurize In-Reply-To: <1989457548.6150811.1481816740700@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1989457548.6150811.1481816740700.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1989457548.6150811.1481816740700@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 at 05:50 Michael Rans via Python-porting < python-porting at python.org> wrote: > Hi, > > Which is the correct way of doing function annotations that work in 2.7 > and 3.5? > > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/#suggested-syntax-for-python-2-7-and-straddling-code > or > http://python-future.org/func_annotations.html#func-annotations > ? > The best ways is either the type comment you mention above or https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/#stub-files. The suggestion from Future will keep the information in the same spot that Python 3 code expects it to be, it won't work with tools like mypy. So if you're doing it to access the info at runtime then the Future suggestion works, but if you're doing it for type checking you want the other ways (and you can obviously combine approaches if you want everything :) ). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: