Thanks for reading my code!
Indeed, it's not hard to create a generic annotation enforcer in Python. Here's my take:
'''Very simple enforcer of type annotations.
This toy super-decorator can decorate all functions in a given module that have
annotations so that the type of input and output is enforced; an AssertionError is
raised on mismatch.
This module also has a test function func() which should fail and logging facility
log which defaults to print.
Since this is a test module, I cut corners by only checking *keyword* arguments.
'''
import sys
log = print
def func(x:'int' = 0) -> 'str':
'''An example function that fails type checking.'''
return x
# For simplicity, I only do keyword args.
def check_type(*args):
param, value, assert_type = args
log('Checking {0} = {1} of {2}.'.format(*args))
if not isinstance(value, assert_type):
raise AssertionError(
'Check failed - parameter {0} = {1} not {2}.'
.format(*args))
return value
def decorate_func(func):
def newf(*args, **kwargs):
for k, v in kwargs.items():
check_type(k, v, ann[k])
return check_type('<return_value>', func(*args, **kwargs), ann['return'])
ann = {k: eval(v) for k, v in func.__annotations__.items()}
newf.__doc__ = func.__doc__
newf.__type_checked = True
return newf
def decorate_module(module = '__main__'):
'''Enforces type from annotation for all functions in module.'''
d = sys.modules[module].__dict__
for k, f in d.items():
if getattr(f, '__annotations__', {}) and not getattr(f, '__type_checked', False):
log('Decorated {0!r}.'.format(f.__name__))
d[k] = decorate_func(f)
if __name__ == '__main__':
decorate_module()
# This will raise AssertionError.
func(x = 5)
Given this simplicity, it's strange at the first sight that this thing is not mainstream. However, I believe there are good reasons why it's not as useful as it might seem. Generally, type checking helps because if you add integer and dictionary, chances are you made some obvious mistake (and if you meant something reasonable, it's still better to be explicit than implicit).
But in real life you often mix quantities of the same computer type as seen by compiler but clearly different human type, for example the following snippet contains an obvious mistake:
height = 1.75 # Bob's height in meters.
length = len(sys.modules) # Number of modules imported by program.
area = height * length # What's that supposed to mean???
Any human should immediately see a mistake in the above line provided it knows the 'human type' of variables height and length even though it looks to computer as perfectly legal multiplication of int and float.
There's more that can be said about possible solutions to this problem, but enforcing 'computer types' is apparently a half-solution, so, at least in my opinion, it's worse than no solution at all. It's the same reason why Systems Hungarian is a terrible idea while Apps Hungarian is a great one. There's more at the very informative post of Joel Spolsky.
Now if somebody was to implement some kind of Pythonic third-party library that would automatically assign to real-world data its human type and then took care to transform that type like width * height -> area and enforce that check with function annotations, I think that would be a type checking people could really use!
