New maintainer needed

[agronholm]

I currently don't have the resources to maintain this project. If someone is willing to put in the time to do it, I'm willing to assign the necessary privileges to that person. If you're willing to do this, reply on this issue or send me email.

[idvorkin]

Is there a different library you recommend with similar functionality?

[agronholm]

The only other run-time type checker library that is currently maintained is Beartype. But a new major release of typguard is coming (there are betas out already), so you don't need to switch just yet.

[jedie]

@agronholm So you have more time to maintain this project, now?

[agronholm]

I'm juggling projects, as usual. Once v4.0.0 has more or less stabilized, I'm switching to another project and won't be touching this one for a while (sans maybe some low effort bugfixes). If somebody volunteered to spend more time on this project, that would be great.

[fractionalhare]

@agronholm I'm willing to maintain this project. I actually wrote a runtime type checker as a decorator function at work before switching to use this. Would be happy to maintain it for you.

[agronholm]

@agronholm I'm willing to maintain this project. I actually wrote a runtime type checker as a decorator function at work before switching to use this. Would be happy to maintain it for you.

Fantastic! Are you sure you're not intimidated by the sheer amount of magic the instrumentation code does? 😄

But really, this would be a load off my back. I could hand over the reins once the dust settles on v4.0.

[agronholm]

@fractionalhare Now with v4.0.0 final out, would you still be willing to take on maintainership?

[jedie]

Sad, that there is no other maintainer here...

But maybe it's a good idea to move to beartype ??? Seems to be a similar project.
And it's very active: https:/beartype/beartype/graphs/contributors

[agronholm]

I don't think it's very ethical to come to my project's GH, advertising a competitor just because I haven't released an update within the last 4 months. I have many other projects I'm also maintaining; I just haven't gotten around to updating this one yet.

[jedie]

@agronholm Sorry. I can totally understand your point. We all have to less time and to much to do, isn't it? I also have too many projects and too little time.

I think typeguard is a very good solution. But in generally it's always a good idea to combine resources, isn't it? Wouldn't it be worth considering working on beartype rather than having too little time for typeguard? I don't know the details, but it seems to me that both projects are very, very similar.

[agronholm]

Beartype is worlds apart in its style and mechanics. I don't think we'd ever see eye to eye on how to work on it. Why did Cecil build his own project from the scratch, rather than forking Typeguard if he was unhappy with it, given that Typeguard had already been around for 5 years at that point? I also dislike his obsession to needlessly write pages and pages of prose everywhere.

[arnimarj]

Having used typeguard with excellent results I've gained a healthy respect for runtime type-checking in Python.

This then made me highly suspicious with the claims in beartype that it could to O(1) type-checking of any data structure (admittedly the fine print, buried in a tiresome and condescending section called maths, does mention that it only does a limited random probe).

[agronholm]

This then made me highly suspicious with the claims in beartype that it could to O(1) type-checking of any data structure (admittedly the fine print, buried in a tiresome and condescending section called maths, does mention that it only does a limited random probe).

Yes, and I mistakenly followed suit, leading to this project getting a bug report roughly every two weeks about typeguard not checking collections properly. I'm going to revert the default to checking all collection items in the next major release.