Message 391497 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author	larry
Recipients	JelleZijlstra, barry, eric.smith, gvanrossum, kj, larry, methane, xtreak
Date	2021-04-21.07:52:47
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<1618991567.14.0.619473904002.issue43817@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to

Content
Hmm. If o.__annotations__ is None, should this function set the empty dict on the object? That seems slightly too opinionated to me. On the other hand, the user would probably expect that they could change the dict they got back. (If Python shipped with a builtin "frozen dict", I suppose I could safely return one of those.) Note that the danger of this happening should drop to about zero, assuming I push through my other small patch: https://bugs.python.org/issue43901

Hmm.  If o.__annotations__ is None, should this function set the empty dict on the object?  That seems slightly too opinionated to me.  On the other hand, the user would probably expect that they could change the dict they got back.  (If Python shipped with a builtin "frozen dict", I suppose I could safely return one of those.)


Note that the danger of this happening should drop to about zero, assuming I push through my other small patch:

https://bugs.python.org/issue43901

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2021-04-21 07:52:47	larry	set	recipients: + larry, gvanrossum, barry, eric.smith, methane, JelleZijlstra, xtreak, kj
2021-04-21 07:52:47	larry	set	messageid: <1618991567.14.0.619473904002.issue43817@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2021-04-21 07:52:47	larry	link	issue43817 messages
2021-04-21 07:52:47	larry	create