Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #94924
| References | <mpmcdb$eek$1@ger.gmane.org> <427038102.1314110.1438595894636.JavaMail.root@sequans.com> |
|---|---|
| From | Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> |
| Date | 2015-08-03 02:26 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Python 3 May Become Relevant Now |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.1174.1438597650.3674.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 1:58 AM, Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanmichel@sequans.com> 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. > > I don't get it. This is where you would use optional types. Optional[List[X]] is a shorthand for the type Union[List[X], None]. In fact static type checking can be quite useful in this sort of case. If you return Optional[List[X]] in one place, and you have some other method that takes in the value but simply indicates that it takes List[X], then the static checker will flag that as an error, and you'll know that a part of your code likely isn't handling the None case correctly.
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Python 3 May Become Relevant Now Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 02:26 -0800
csiph-web