Ken Jin <kenjin4...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> I think those should go with the individual types as well The list[] and dict[] stdtypes are in a different document from collections.abc.*. While this helps logical separation, I feel like it'd be tougher searching for type information compared to our current aggregate-everything-in-typing approach. Where type hints for types should belong has been a hot subject for some time. This was discussed at the typing summit, and also by the docs WG. - Docs WG: https://github.com/python/docs-community/issues/8 - Downstream typing possible tutorial: https://github.com/python/typing/issues/891 - Downstream typing's docs: https://github.com/python/typing/tree/master/docs The general consensus it seems is to separate complex information from the CPython docs. I like this approach because type hints have zero meaning to CPython, so placing them in docs meant for runtime behavior feels strange. OTOH, external docs won't be able to keep up with the subtleties of multiple different versions of typing in CPython. So *some* information should be kept in CPython docs. I think for now, a link in collections.abc pointing to typing would suffice. In the future when Python 3.9 becomes an "old" version and PEP 585 notation is commonplace, we should copy them over like Guido suggested (and if Raymond is OK with collections.abc docs including that sort of information). Guido or Raymond may have other plans though ;-). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue45352> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
