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 563: Correct references to 3.10 default adoption #2086

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Sep 25, 2021

Conversation

xochozomatli
Copy link
Contributor

Edited two sentences to reflect that PEP 563 won't be default until at least 3.11 if ever.

Resolves #2084

pep-0563.rst Outdated
Comment on lines 286 to 287
This is projected to become the default behavior starting in Python 3.11 or
later. Use of annotations incompatible with this PEP is no longer supported.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since @brettcannon approves I'm okay with this, but we really should wait for the discussion about PEP 649 before we announce any "projections". This may well never become the default behavior, if PEP 649 prevails.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Would it be appropriate to address the current situation in this PEP or are edits generally limited to corrections?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You can mark it with e.g. Update: or Note:

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.

LG except for 1 nit. Thanks!

pep-0563.rst Outdated
``__future__`` import in Python 3.7.


Rationale and Goals
===================

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please put this blank line back.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oops. On it.

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.

Yes!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

PEP 563: Update references to full adoption from 3.10 to 3.11
4 participants