Message285548
Cool! This set of basic initial check will consist of all the is_* functions that were mentioned right?
FWIW I also think that this is the way to go, as it’s not obvious if the semantics should be “conforms to this type annotation” or “is a type annotation of that kind” or other variants.
In case this isn’t already too much future think: What should be the way forward from there? E.g. when working with Union[A, B], you will probably want to get “(A, B)”.
So will that mean more introspection functions (like union_types(Union[str,int]),
or public APIs for typings (e.g. a_union.__iter__() or a_union.types)? |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2017-01-16 10:03:57 | flying sheep | set | recipients:
+ flying sheep, gvanrossum, levkivskyi, evan_ |
2017-01-16 10:03:57 | flying sheep | set | messageid: <1484561037.69.0.944534639977.issue29262@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2017-01-16 10:03:57 | flying sheep | link | issue29262 messages |
2017-01-16 10:03:57 | flying sheep | create | |
|