Skip to content

Optional strict checking of overloads #4333

Closed
Closed
Optional strict checking of overloads#4333
Labels
featureneeds discussionpriority-2-lowtopic-overloads

Description

@JukkaL
JukkaL
opened on Dec 6, 2017

Currently the type checking of overloads is unsafe. We could potentially make them safe through a configuration option, at the cost of some flexibility.

#4332 is a similar idea for isinstance checks, and some of the discussion there is also relevant here.

Activity

  1. JukkaL
    added
    feature
    needs discussion
    priority-2-low
    on Dec 6, 2017
  2. ilevkivskyi
    added
    topic-overloads
    on May 20, 2018

  3. ilevkivskyi commented on Jun 15, 2018

    @ilevkivskyi
    ilevkivskyi
    on Jun 15, 2018
    Member

    Btw, now the overload treatment is much more strict than it used to be, so I am not sure such flag would be valuable now.

  4. JukkaL commented on Jan 29, 2020

    @JukkaL
    JukkaL
    on Jan 29, 2020
    CollaboratorAuthor

    This flag doesn't seem worth it any more. @Michael0x2a's work on overloads has fixed some of the biggest issues, in particular.

  5. JukkaL
    closed this as completedon Jan 29, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    featureneeds discussionpriority-2-lowtopic-overloads

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions