gh-130881: Handle conditionally defined annotations#130935
gh-130881: Handle conditionally defined annotations#130935JelleZijlstra merged 11 commits intopython:mainfrom
Conversation
JelleZijlstra
requested review from
carljm,
iritkatriel and
markshannon
as code owners
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I won't force you to follow PEP-7 as the file has a mix of everything which makes it very hard to choose a convention. You can also ignore my suggestion in symtable.c if you think it's not necessary and if the surrounding code is using the same writing style.
picnixz
left a comment
picnixz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I reviewed the changes, though I'm not entirely sure about the tests themselves so another eye is welcome
|
Once this is merged, should the text in PEP 649 be updated to reflect this change?
|
Co-authored-by: Bénédikt Tran <10796600+picnixz@users.noreply.github.com>
tomasr8
left a comment
tomasr8
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just some comments/questions for the tests, otherwise looks good :)
I don't own PEP 649 so I can't update it. Could add it to PEP 749 but I already submitted it to the SC. |
Larry is the owner. @larryhastings should the PEP be updated? |
|
Accepted PEPs are historical documents; as a rule I'm averse to changing them after they're accepted. PEP 749 is the perfect place to document this change to what's specified in 649. |
picnixz
left a comment
picnixz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Two nits I missed but otherwise, looks good to me
Co-authored-by: Bénédikt Tran <10796600+picnixz@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Bénédikt Tran <10796600+picnixz@users.noreply.github.com>
On Python 3.14, this module attribute seems to exist in certain
situations:
```pycon
>>> if True:
... a: str
...
>>> __conditional_annotations__
{0}
```
It's a pretty esoteric attribute without any documentation. It seems to
have been added in python/cpython#130935
Either way, stubtest was complaining about it in scipy-stubs. So all
things considered, I figured it'd be best to just ignore it.
4 participants
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.