Funny how object-oriented programming got so big, when the unsolved hierarchy of numerical types has been there from the beginning.
The idea that inheritance will solve conceptual problems when we can't define whether `unsigned int` is a parent or child of `int`. And don't even start on the special casing necessary for type promotions in numerical expressions.
These thoughts brought to you by Python 3.10 generating a SyntaxWarning on "x is not 0"
(x can be either False or 0, and, fun fact, in Python, False == 0)
More proof that maybe we shouldn't have taken a sometimes-convenient way to lay out memory gets and elevated it to a dogma of ontology.
The memory-centric folks have long moved on to entity component systems, would be nice if there were more affordances for the rest of us, too.
Instead, FastAPI/Pydantic/typing in general is just pouring more concrete on the inheritance approach.
"sure, inheritance sucked for the use case we know most intimately as programmers, but it will be great for all those other fields we are fuzzy on"