Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Adam Turner <9087854+AA-Turner@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Hugo van Kemenade <1324225+hugovk@users.noreply.github.com>

Author: 3 people

peps/pep-0781.rst

@@ -7,16 +7,20 @@ Type: Standards Track
 Topic: Typing
 Created: 24-Mar-2025
 Python-Version: 3.14
+Post-History: `11-Jan-2025 <https://discuss.python.org/t/76766>`__,
+              `24-Mar-2025 <https://discuss.python.org/t/85728>`__,
 Post-History: `11-Jan-2025 <https://discuss.python.org/t/76766>`__
 
 
 Abstract
 ========
 
-This PEP proposes adding a new keyword ``__type_checking__`` that serves the
-same purpose as :data:`typing.TYPE_CHECKING`.
-This constant is ``True`` when the code is being analyzed by a static type
-checker, and ``False`` during normal runtime execution.
+This PEP proposes adding a new keyword, :data:`!__type_checking__`, to improve
+the experience of writing Python code with type annotations. It is evaluated
+as ``True`` when the code is being analyzed by a static type checker, and as
+``False`` during normal runtime execution. Unlike :data:`typing.TYPE_CHECKING`,
+which this keyword replaces, it does not require an import statement, and
+creates the opportunity for compiler optimizations, such as smaller bytecode.
 
 
 Motivation
@@ -44,8 +48,8 @@ Using Keyword
 -------------
 
 Avoiding the addition of a new :ref:`keyword <python:keywords>`
-(like :data:`__debug__`) would be attractive because more keywords means more
-complex language.
+(like :data:`__debug__`) would be attractive because more keywords means
+a more complex language.
 
 However, adding a constant without a keyword (like :data:`__debug__`) requires
 special handling in both the compiler and runtime.
@@ -60,16 +64,17 @@ Specification
 
 ``__type_checking__`` is a :ref:`keyword <python:keywords>` and its value is
 ``False``.
-It can be used in the same way as ``False``, except it can not be used as
+It can be used in the same way as ``False``, except it cannot be used as
 a matching pattern.
 
-Similar to :data:`typing.TYPE_CHECKING`, type checking tools should treat
-``__type_checking__`` as ``True``.
+Static type checkers must treat ``__type_checking__`` as ``True``,
+similar to :data:`typing.TYPE_CHECKING`.
 
-Once this PEP is accepted, ``__type_checking__`` will be the preferred way over
-``typing.TYPE_CHECKING``. However, ``typing.TYPE_CHECKING`` will not be deprecated.
-Instead, it will be implemented using ``__type_checking__``, allowing future type
-checkers to focus on handling ``__type_checking__`` only.
+If this PEP is accepted, ``__type_checking__`` will be the preferred approach,
+instead of ``typing.TYPE_CHECKING``. However, ``typing.TYPE_CHECKING`` will not
+be deprecated.
+Instead, it will be implemented as ``TYPE_CHECKING = __type_checking__``,
+allowing future type checkers to focus on only handling ``__type_checking__``.
 
 
 How to Teach This