Class-like syntax for union type aliases and natural docstrings

[Monarch]

@mjmikulski

@Monarch, you wrote in another thread:

Tangential: I really dislike type name = value. I much prefer Python’s name: type = value (same for Rust, TypeScript, Kotlin, etc)

I’d be curious what you think of my idea. I also feel that type name = value is a bit c++ish rather than pythonic

That was in the context of the thread proposing C-like variable annotation syntax such as int foo = 10. That’s what I meant when I said I disliked type name = value.

I later clarified this because someone else had the same confusion, evidently my phrasing was pretty poor!

@Monarch

I didn’t realize my comment could get confused for the type statement. I’m a big fan of the type statement in Python.

As for the type statement itself, I have no issues with the current syntax. It also seems to be the convention in several other modern languages:

Rust:       type Result<T> = ...;
TypeScript: type Result<T> = ...;
Go:         type Result[T any] = ...;
Python:     type Result[T] = ...