Merged
Conversation
Josverl
reviewed
Dec 18, 2025
Josverl
requested changes
Dec 18, 2025
Owner
Josverl
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the PR.
The changes make sense to me , but not sure what happened to the formatting.
Please use Ruff or Black , both should pick up formatting from the project root.
- Version - I tend to keep aligned to the MicroPython versions where possible. but for typing that is a recent addition, so perhaps that is just an oversight by me.
- not sure why the version was not in the .mpy , it should not optimized out with mpy-cross -O3 either.
- Provides compatibility as introduced with Python 3.12 / PEP 698. - https://peps.python.org/pep-0698/
9dff822 to
13e1d08
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Notes:
typing_extensions.pyto be an exact match of the updatedtyping.py- as the readme indicates:1.27.0to match the latest release..mpyfiles did not even have the version included - but now they do. Not sure what is expected or most appropriate here.Not sure there are other reasons why this addition should not be included. If accepted, the following should then probably also be looked at for inclusion: