Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
PEP 718: More rationale, use-cases and expansion on monomorphisation #3631
PEP 718: More rationale, use-cases and expansion on monomorphisation #3631
Changes from 2 commits
8c9bc9f
7eb884b
05af74d
3cc54c9
bbf7069
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is maybe a better fit for the discussion, but I find this example disturbing, because it seems I could also write
foo[int](b"hello")
, match theSequence
part of the Union, and now the type checker would infer that the function returnslist[bytes]
instead oflist[int]
. Isn't that inherently unsound?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, I do see your point here but isn't the current situation still unsound because the choosing of the type from the type checker is still up to its logic?