Author odd_bloke
Recipients gvanrossum, lukasz.langa, odd_bloke, r.david.murray
Date 2017-08-14.16:39:54
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
In-reply-to <>
Having ironed out my confusion over typing the method, I agree that making
the types more obvious is not a compelling argument for this change.

That said, I think the current API has been confusing to me in the past,
and I think the proposed change is still a worthwhile improvement for users
of this module.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 12:08 AM Guido van Rossum <>

> Guido van Rossum added the comment:
> I think the proposed change is not worth it. Developments in type checking
> (in particular overloading) make it unambiguous what the return type will
> be from just a static inspection of the call site. (Given that the _UNSET
> value is intended to be private.) See also
> ----------
> nosy: +gvanrossum
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <>
> <>
> _______________________________________
Date User Action Args
2017-08-14 16:39:54odd_blokesetrecipients: + odd_bloke, gvanrossum, r.david.murray, lukasz.langa
2017-08-14 16:39:54odd_blokelinkissue31129 messages
2017-08-14 16:39:54odd_blokecreate