Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed7.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.022 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.96; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:Python': 0.05; '*not*': 0.07; 'suppress': 0.07; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.09; 'none"': 0.09; 'python': 0.10; 'def': 0.13; '7:58': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'hint': 0.16; 'integers.': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'instance,': 0.18; '2015': 0.20; 'cc:2**0': 0.20; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.20; 'aug': 0.20; 'explicit': 0.22; 'code.': 0.23; 'third-party': 0.23; 'this:': 0.23; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'mon,': 0.24; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.27; 'function': 0.28; 'cases.': 0.29; 'dictionary': 0.29; 'allows': 0.30; 'that.': 0.30; 'code': 0.30; 'branch': 0.30; "i'd": 0.31; 'another': 0.32; 'maybe': 0.33; 'run': 0.33; 'common': 0.33; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'maps': 0.35; 'possible,': 0.35; 'returning': 0.35; 'quite': 0.35; "isn't": 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'there': 0.36; 'cases': 0.36; 'pm,': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'being': 0.37; 'method': 0.37; 'things': 0.38; 'no,': 0.38; 'anything': 0.38; 'end': 0.39; 'means': 0.39; 'enough': 0.39; 'easily': 0.39; 'where': 0.40; 'still': 0.40; 'some': 0.40; 'easy': 0.60; 'your': 0.60; "you'll": 0.61; 'more': 0.63; 'guides': 0.72; 'checker': 0.84; 'chrisa': 0.84; 'subject:Become': 0.84; 'to:none': 0.91; 'subject:Now': 0.91; 'suffer': 0.93; 'thing,': 0.93 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type; bh=C4eAWkXKyviB0Xsc3Cm+Dro9tbsEWyjDaSLCpofIztg=; b=Z8l5s7nZGLGE8JAnyk3n+men1/dP4fi93Io4ag3D8uZPQoFDbjVmxn1f9QjiFVb2zv IrCV1OMx4nT42jsS/bYKbXx+XpNNhHIcu12dexSa6STNdS/y2/wnIPPVmshCUs2sEiU3 Fk8rSpsLc2aEf9f/cw1Bmmnm9srS14susnYJ2ihRyMJHvJnjaTUh7zeW/fMkXXWHpK8O mZzrBfp8HLJlCY3hg/V4Mzuz5UJuCdoNpa8/cUvZjV+rX5S0Fc/SwDXmh3XnF0CyUuZV iKm17mtlHb7eYLcjUreEukB+Gs+GRgQsbfwiheZ2KirjQ9D82ZC5a1ZmpIPvNt+r3/rA zgTw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.12.141 with SMTP id 13mr18076434iom.157.1438597701995; Mon, 03 Aug 2015 03:28:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <427038102.1314110.1438595894636.JavaMail.root@sequans.com> References: <427038102.1314110.1438595894636.JavaMail.root@sequans.com> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 20:28:21 +1000 Subject: Re: Python 3 May Become Relevant Now From: Chris Angelico Cc: "python-list@python.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 33 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1438597704 news.xs4all.nl 2942 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:41365 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:94925 On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Jean-Michel Pichavant wrote: > But if I get things right, with python 3.5 type hint checker, I'd be screwed, as it is spefificaly designed to track this kind of "problem". > What's the use of None then ? Any method returning None can only return None or suffer the type checker retribution. 1) Python 3.5 will not include a type checker. All it'll include is enough stubs that your code will run correctly; plus it has a set of specifications for how third-party checkers should be advised, which means you'll be able to use any such checker with the same code. But nothing will happen till you actually run such a checker. 2) Since "returns X or None" is such a common thing, it's very easy to spell. More complicated things are possible, too, but less cleanly. Python still allows you to return anything from anything, and that isn't changing; but there are a number of common cases - for instance, this function might always return a number, or maybe it'll always return a dictionary that maps strings to integers. Those are easily spelled. So no, a method that can return None is most definitely *not* required to return None in all cases. Although you may find that some linters and code style guides object to code like this: def some_function(some_arg): if some_condition: return some_expression where one branch has an explicit 'return' and another doesn't. That's a quite reasonable objection, and an explicit "return None" at the end will suppress the warning, by being more explicit that this might return this or that. ChrisA