[minism]

Same thing happened to the JS world with typescript (though typescript seems more powerful than python type annotations).

Its fine though - I'm glad the culture is trending towards understanding that strong typing saves you time rather than causes you extra time. This is true even for very small and simple programs, and even if you're the only developer.

[goatlover]

The typing debate has been ongoing for decades, and it's switched back and forth a few times. JS, Python and Ruby all came out in the 90s, after there were plenty of statically typed languages being used at the time. Alan Kay has argued that types are too restrictive and usually don't describe the kind of data the program is really about. Maybe that's not as true for an advanced typing language like Haskell. And maybe Kay had C and Pascal in mind, when he thought of objects as being the basis for a proper dynamic type system.

[bayesian_horse]

C,Pascal, even C# and C++ need type annotations mostly to actually make the program work. The type systems in Typescript and F# are more about helping the developer than helping the compiler.

Python type hints are slightly different because there are type hints as a syntax feature and then there is type checking, which can be static like mypy or during runtime like Beartype. Every type checker comes with its own type system, though they are hopefully somewhat similar...

[andrewingram]

TypeScript has a more powerful type system, but arguably it's less powerful because the hints are invisible to runtime code. Python doesn't do any runtime type checking by default, but the hints are accessible in code, which unlocks a fair amount of power. For example, Strawberry is a GraphQL server library that allows you to define your GraphQL schema using the same syntax as dataclasses.