@@ -14,11 +14,12 @@ Post-History: `11-Jan-2025 <https://discuss.python.org/t/76766>`__,
1414Abstract
1515========
1616
17- This PEP proposes adding a new built-in variable, :data: `!TYPE_CHECKING `, to improve
18- the experience of writing Python code with type annotations. It is evaluated
19- as ``True `` when the code is being analyzed by a static type checker, and as
20- ``False `` during normal runtime execution. Unlike :data: `typing.TYPE_CHECKING `,
21- which this variable replaces, it does not require an import statement.
17+ This PEP proposes adding a new built-in variable, :data: `!TYPE_CHECKING `, to
18+ improve the experience of writing Python code with type annotations. It is
19+ evaluated as ``True `` when the code is being analyzed by a static type checker,
20+ and as ``False `` during normal runtime execution. Unlike
21+ :data: `typing.TYPE_CHECKING `, which this variable replaces, it does not require
22+ an import statement.
2223
2324
2425Motivation
@@ -88,7 +89,8 @@ How to Teach This
8889=================
8990
9091* Use ``if TYPE_CHECKING: `` for skipping type-checking code at runtime.
91- * Use ``from typing import TYPE_CHECKING `` to support Python versions before 3.14.
92+ * Use ``from typing import TYPE_CHECKING `` to support Python versions before
93+ 3.14.
9294* Workarounds like ``TYPE_CHECKING = False `` or ``if False: # TYPE_CHECKING ``
9395 will continue to work, but are not recommended.
9496
0 commit comments