[tommikaikkonen]

I love using attrs, like the idea of bringing something similar to the standard library, but strongly disagree with the dataclasses API. It treats untyped Python as a second class citizen.

This is what I'd prefer

  from dataclasses import dataclass, field

  @dataclass
  class MyClass:
    x = field()

but it produces an error because fields need to be declared with a type annotation. This is the GvR recommended way to get around it:

  @dataclass
  class MyClass:
    x: object

You could use the typing.Any type instead of object, but then you need to import a whole typing library to use untyped dataclasses. I highly prefer the former code block.

There's a big thread discussing the issue on python-dev somewhere. Also some discussion in https://github.com/ericvsmith/dataclasses/issues/2#issuecomm...

Anyway, it's not a huge issue—attrs is great and there's no reason not to use it instead for untyped Python.

[sleavey]

Yeah, it seems strange to force people to use type hints when it has had such a mixed reception. I really tried to use type hints with a new project a few months ago, but ended up stripping it all out again because it's just so damn ugly. I wish it were possible to fully define type hints in a separate file for linters, and not mix it in with production code. It's kind of possible to do it, but not fully [1], and mixing type hints inline and in separate files is in my opinion even worse than one or the other.

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/47350570/is-it-possible-...

[rezistik]

I've always wanted a programming UI similar to RapGenius's UI. With annotations and docs being opened in a form panel.