| ▲ | curiousgal 4 hours ago |
| I can't help but find type hints in python to be..goofy? I have a colleague who has a substantial C++ background and now working in python, the code is just littered with TypeAlias, Generic, cast, long Unions etc.. this can't be the way.. |
|
| ▲ | tialaramex 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Typing is a relatively easy way for the human author and the machine to notice if they disagree about what's going on before problems arise. It is unfortunate that Python doesn't do a good job with types, I was reading earlier today about the mess they made of booleans - their bool type is actually just the integers again. |
| |
| ▲ | nubg 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > I was reading earlier today about the mess they made of booleans Can you elaborate on that? | | |
| ▲ | tech2 an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | It's not entirely fair. Prior to 2.3 Python didn't have booleans, just "truthiness". In 2.3 they added the Boolean class as a subclass of int (because of patterns of development it was a pragmatic choice). True and False were introduced, but they were able to be reassigned which could cause all manner of fun. 3.x made them keywords which put a stop to that but the int aspect remained. | |
| ▲ | tialaramex 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Because Python decided that (for the usual New Jersey reason, simplicity of implementation) bool should just be an integer type the Liskov criterion comes into play. If we can X an integer and we've agreed bool is an integer => we can X a bool. That's not what booleans are but hey, it's sorta close and this was easier to implement. So, can we add two bools together? Adding booleans together is nonsense, but we've said these are a kind of integer so sure, I guess True + True = 2 ? And this cascades into nonsense like ~True being a valid operation in Python and its result is true... | | |
| ▲ | jcgl 5 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > So, can we add two bools together? Adding booleans together is nonsense, but we've said these are a kind of integer so sure, I guess True + True = 2 ? And this cascades into nonsense like ~True being a valid operation in Python and its result is true... The bitwise negation is indeed janky and inaccurate, but True + True = 2 is absolutely a valid thing to say in boolean algebra. Addition mean "or", and multiplication means "and." |
| |
| ▲ | IshKebab 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | He did - booleans are integers: >>> isinstance(False, int)
True
A related screw-up is implicitly casting everything to bool. A lot of languages made that mistake.Overall I'd say they didn't do an awful job though. The main problems with Python are the absolutely abysmal tooling (which thankfully uv fixes), the abysmal performance (which sometimes isn't an issue, but it usually becomes an issue eventually), and the community's attitude to type checking. Actually type checking code you've written yourself with Pyright in strict mode is quite a pleasant experience. But woe betide you if you want to import any third party libraries. There's at least a 50% chance they have no type annotations at all, and often it's deliberate. Typescript used to have a similar problem but the Javascript community realised a lot quicker than the Python community that type hints are a no-brainer. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | wiseowise 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What is the way in your opinion? |
|
| ▲ | IshKebab 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I strongly disagree. Python has actually done a decent job of adding type annotations into the language IMO. If you ignore the bit where they don't actually specify their semantics anyway. > this can't be the way.. The alternative is fragile and unmaintainable code. I know which I prefer! |