Hacker News Reader

Comment by hbrn | Hacker News Reader

What's even worse, when typing is treated as an indisputable virtue (and not a tradeoff), pretty much every team starts sacrificing readability for the sake of typing.

And lo and behold, they end up with _more_ design bugs. And the sad part is that they will never even recognize that too much typing is to blame.

View on HN

Nonsense. You might consider it a tradeoff, but it's a very heavily skewed one. Minor downsides on one side, huge upsides on the other.

Also I would say type hints sacrifice aesthetics, not readability. Most code with type hints is easier to read, in the same way that graphs with labelled axes and units are easier to read. They might have more "stuff" there which people might think is ugly, but they convey critical information which allows you to understand the code.

> Most code with type hints is easier to read

That has not been my experience in the past few years.

I've always been a fan of type hints in Python: intention behind them was to contribute to readability and when developer had that intention in mind, they worked really well.

However, with the release of mypy and Typescript, engineering culture largely shifted towards "typing is a virtue" mindset. Type hints are no longer a documentation tool, they are a constraint enforcing tool. And that tool is often at odds with readability.

Readability is subjective and ephemeral, type constraints (and intellisense) are very tangible. Naturally, developers are failing to find balance between the two.

I write a lot of typescript and rust. In those languages, when I want to understand some code I haven’t seen before, I always start by reading the types. Understanding what and how the data moves through a system is usually key to understanding everything. And usually I lean heavily on my editor for this - in typescript there’s a lot of value in the simple act of hovering over values to see what type they are.

I’m working with a medium size python program at the moment. It’s mostly written by someone smart but early career, and they’ve made a rabbit warren of classes and mixins that get combined in complex ways. I’ve been encouraging him to add types - and wherever those types exist, the code becomes 100% more legible to my code editor - and ultimately to me.

I don’t think I’d bother with types in Python for small programs. But my experience is that good type hints lay out a welcome mat to anyone who comes along later to figure the code out. And honestly, a lot of the time that person is the original author, just months or years after the code was written.

> intention behind them was to contribute to readability

This is provably wrong. See https://peps.python.org/pep-3107/#use-cases

Have you read the whole section?

> Documentation for parameters and return values ([23])

> Let IDEs show what types a function expects and returns ([16])

> For example, one library might use string-based annotations to provide improved help messages, like so:

  def compile(source: "something compilable",
    filename: "where the compilable thing comes from",
    mode: "is this a single statement or a suite?"):

> pretty much every team starts sacrificing readability

People are sacrificing this when they start using python in the first place

Reply on news.ycombinator.com