Python

6366 readers

4 users here now

Welcome to the Python community on the programming.dev Lemmy instance!

📅 Events

Past

November 2023

PyCon Ireland 2023, 11-12th
PyData Tel Aviv 2023 14th

October 2023

PyConES Canarias 2023, 6-8th
DjangoCon US 2023, 16-20th (!django 💬)

July 2023

PyDelhi Meetup, 2nd
PyCon Israel, 4-5th
DFW Pythoneers, 6th
Django Girls Abraka, 6-7th
SciPy 2023 10-16th, Austin
IndyPy, 11th
Leipzig Python User Group, 11th
Austin Python, 12th
EuroPython 2023, 17-23rd
Austin Python: Evening of Coding, 18th
PyHEP.dev 2023 - "Python in HEP" Developer's Workshop, 25th

August 2023

PyLadies Dublin, 15th
EuroSciPy 2023, 14-18th

September 2023

PyData Amsterdam, 14-16th
PyCon UK, 22nd - 25th

🐍 Python project:

💓 Python Community:

#python IRC for general questions
#python-dev IRC for CPython developers
PySlackers Slack channel
Python Discord server
Python Weekly newsletters
Mailing lists
Forum

✨ Python Ecosystem:

🌌 Fediverse

Communities

#python on Mastodon
c/django on programming.dev
c/pythorhead on lemmy.dbzer0.com

Projects

Pythörhead: a Python library for interacting with Lemmy
Plemmy: a Python package for accessing the Lemmy API
pylemmy pylemmy enables simple access to Lemmy's API with Python
mastodon.py, a Python wrapper for the Mastodon API

Feeds

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Has using 'thing = liststr <>' instead of 'thing: list[str] = []' any downsides? (feddit.de)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I have seen some people prefer to create a list of strings by using thing = list[str]() instead of thing: list[str] = []. I think it looks kinda weird, but maybe that's just because I have never seen that syntax before. Does that have any downsides?

It is also possible to use this for dicts: thing = dict[str, SomeClass](). Looks equally weird to me. Is that widely used? Would you use it? Would you point it out in a code review?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You'd always want to use varname: type_description = initial_value pattern. It's readable, is the same pattern you use in method params, and linters and IDEs recognize this pattern. And it makes sense for the type description be on the left side of the assignment operator, together with the variable it's describing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I'm pretty sure most type checkers recognise both forms.