You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Most of the python-based algorithms are not annotated by types as specified by PEP 483 and PEP 484
Using generic types to provide these improvements is an effective way to enforce good practices and provide general documentation for other users quickly.
Implementation
This can be discussed using central generic types with specifically defined types for only those algorithms that work on some certain types (like counting sort) or each file having its independent types
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@diptangsu What do you think about which approach should be taken?
Single file with all generics and specialized one in individual files
Each file with its own type defined
Both have there pros and cons and personally I am thinking of going with second option to make the code completely independent at the cost of duplication
I also think we should go with each file having its own annotations.
Anyone who wants to only look at one code won't have to look elsewhere.
And most of the lists would anyway be List[Any] haha.
Description
Most of the python-based algorithms are not annotated by types as specified by PEP 483 and PEP 484
Using generic types to provide these improvements is an effective way to enforce good practices and provide general documentation for other users quickly.
Implementation
This can be discussed using central generic types with specifically defined types for only those algorithms that work on some certain types (like counting sort) or each file having its independent types
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: