Skip to content
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 647: Mark as Final #3577

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 10, 2024
Merged

PEP 647: Mark as Final #3577

merged 3 commits into from
Feb 10, 2024

Conversation

hugovk
Copy link
Member

@hugovk hugovk commented Dec 10, 2023

  • Final implementation has been merged (including tests and docs)
  • PEP matches the final implementation
  • Any substantial changes since the accepted version approved by the SC/PEP delegate
  • Pull request title in appropriate format (PEP 123: Mark Final)
  • Status changed to Final (and Python-Version is correct)
  • Canonical docs/spec linked with a canonical-doc directive (or canonical-pypa-spec, for packaging PEPs)

Helps #2872 and #3579.

Link to https://docs.python.org/3/library/typing.html#typing.TypeGuard as the canonical docs, and remove some redundant headers.

cc @Fidget-Spinner


📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://pep-previews--3577.org.readthedocs.build/pep-0647/

Copy link
Member

@Fidget-Spinner Fidget-Spinner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh yeah the implementation is done. Source: me and Guido implemented it https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.10.html#pep-647-user-defined-type-guards.

@JelleZijlstra
Copy link
Member

I'd prefer to wait until the typing spec is merged, then point to the spec as the canonical implementation. (This goes for all typing PEPs.)

@hugovk
Copy link
Member Author

hugovk commented Dec 10, 2023

That sounds like a good idea, about half of the 45 "may not be implemented yet" PEPs are typing. :)

Until then, shall I close this and #3575, or convert them to drafts?

@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member

I'd prefer to wait until the typing spec is merged, then point to the spec as the canonical implementation. (This goes for all typing PEPs.)

Did you mean canonical documentation?

@JelleZijlstra
Copy link
Member

Did you mean canonical documentation?

Oops, yes.

Until then, shall I close this and #3575, or convert them to drafts?

Let's just wait. We should be able to merge the spec once Guido OKs it :)

@hugovk hugovk closed this Dec 18, 2023
@hugovk hugovk deleted the pep647-mark-as-final branch December 18, 2023 21:33
@hugovk hugovk restored the pep647-mark-as-final branch February 10, 2024 16:23
@hugovk
Copy link
Member Author

hugovk commented Feb 10, 2024

I think I accidentally deleted this branch in December, which closed the PR.

Anyway, the typing spec has been published so we can link there now. PR updated and re-opened!

@hugovk hugovk reopened this Feb 10, 2024
@hugovk hugovk merged commit 9c7c5e0 into python:main Feb 10, 2024
6 checks passed
@hugovk hugovk deleted the pep647-mark-as-final branch February 10, 2024 18:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants