Skip to content

bpo-41428: Implementation for PEP 604 #21515

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

Merged
merged 62 commits into from
Sep 9, 2020

Conversation

MaggieMoss
Copy link
Contributor

@MaggieMoss MaggieMoss commented Jul 17, 2020

PEP 604 - Proposed Implementation

https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0604/

Building off of the comments left on this PR here: https://github.com/pprados/cpython/tree/PEP604

https://bugs.python.org/issue41428

@MaggieMoss MaggieMoss requested review from gvanrossum, ilevkivskyi and a team as code owners July 17, 2020 00:07
@the-knights-who-say-ni

This comment has been minimized.

@MaggieMoss MaggieMoss changed the title Pep605 implementation Pep604 - Draft Implementation Jul 17, 2020
@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member

Thank you so much! Give me a few days to review this. Ping me if you haven't heard from me by Wednesday!

@gvanrossum gvanrossum changed the title Pep604 - Draft Implementation PEP 604 - Draft Implementation Jul 18, 2020
Copy link
Member

@gvanrossum gvanrossum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great start! Here's a boatload of review comments, from whitespace nits to feature requests.

Copy link
Member

@gvanrossum gvanrossum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(Presumably you were going to add more commits before asking for another review?)

@MaggieMoss
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gvanrossum thanks so much for the comments! I'll implement your suggestions and clean this up :)

@MaggieMoss MaggieMoss requested a review from pablogsal August 18, 2020 22:32
@MaggieMoss
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gvanrossum

I had thought of another case we might need to handle here, and was hoping to get your input. Should this:

typing.Union[int, str] is (int | str)

evaluate to true?

@MaggieMoss
Copy link
Contributor Author

@pablogsal let me know if there are any other changes you'd like to see here.

@pablogsal
Copy link
Member

@pablogsal let me know if there are any other changes you'd like to see here.

I just need to find some time to do another iteration 😉 Will try to do another pass by tomorrow, but we are very close! Thanks for the patience and tye good work :)

@pablogsal
Copy link
Member

@MaggieMoss I have pushed a new commit (8c06c1d) to do some simplifications and to fix some minor reference count issues and crashes. Please, check out that everything seems ok in that commit :)

Copy link
Member

@pablogsal pablogsal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks good to me!

Thanks for all the work and patience @MaggieMoss! Great job :)

@gvanrossum I won't land it myself in case you or Maggie want to take a last check.

Copy link
Member

@gvanrossum gvanrossum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it's good! Thanks so much Maggie for all your work.

@MaggieMoss
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks so much for all of your reviews and comments, I've really appreciated it. 🎉

@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member

@MaggieMoss
I noticed that some tests failed on Windows. Could it be that you need to rebase to the latest master?

"test.test_asyncio.test_sendfile.ProactorEventLoopTests.test_sendfile_close_peer_in_the_middle_of_receiving"

@pablogsal
Copy link
Member

@MaggieMoss
I noticed that some tests failed on Windows. Could it be that you need to rebase to the latest master?

"test.test_asyncio.test_sendfile.ProactorEventLoopTests.test_sendfile_close_peer_in_the_middle_of_receiving"

That's an unrelated race condition in asyncio in Windows, we can ignore it and just land

@pablogsal pablogsal merged commit 1b4552c into python:master Sep 9, 2020
@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member

gvanrossum commented Sep 9, 2020 via email

xzy3 pushed a commit to xzy3/cpython that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2020
See https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0604/ for more information.

Co-authored-by: Pablo Galindo <pablogsal@gmail.com>
AlexWaygood added a commit to AlexWaygood/typeshed that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2021
- `__or__` was added to `TypeVar` in Python 3.10: https://bugs.python.org/issue41428 (this PR: python/cpython#21515)
- `__or__` was added to `ForwardRef` in Python 3.11: https://bugs.python.org/issue45489
JelleZijlstra pushed a commit to python/typeshed that referenced this pull request Dec 5, 2021
- `__or__` was added to `TypeVar` in Python 3.10: https://bugs.python.org/issue41428 (this PR: python/cpython#21515)
- `__or__` was added to `ForwardRef` in Python 3.11: https://bugs.python.org/issue45489
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.

5 participants