HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
meta
pyre-check
OCaml2018–2025
meta / pyre-check · Archived

pyre-check

Performant type-checking for python.

Security & PrivacyTesting & Quality
Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
24Distinct people
26Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
7.2KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Performant type-checking for python.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 11:34:28 AM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year26 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2018-05-11 16:24:10 UTC to 2025-04-29 15:17:18 UTC.

02462018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 0 submissions, 4 comments20182019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 5 mentions; 1 submissions, 4 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 1 submissions, 5 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments20212022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 0 submissions, 4 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC404
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC514
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC615
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC303
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC404
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

5 sources
meowface·Sep 16, 2019
Python supports optional static typing annotations now. There are four popular typecheckers that I'm aware of (mypy [1], pyre [2], pyright [3], pytype [4]), which is a little confusing, but any of the four will catch a lot of type issues that typical statically typed language compilers would catch. It's not as robust as true static typing - there are sometimes false positives and false negatives - but I find it helpful. [1] https://github.com/python/mypy [2] https://github.com/facebook/pyre-check [3] https://github.com/microsoft/pyright [4] https://github.com/google/pytype
In The boring technology behind a one-person Internet company (2018)
ehsankia·Jun 12, 2019
There's a great 5m lightning talk from Pycon 2019 explaining the difference between pytype and mypy[0]. It's great that there's different libraries approaching the problem from different angles. Speaking of which, I'm also curious to see how Facebook's Pyre[1] differs from the former two. I'm surprise there's isn't a comprehensive comparison of the 3 libraries yet. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFcCuinRVnU&t=38m25s [1] https://github.com/facebook/pyre-check
In A Failed Experiment with Python Type Annotations
jchw·Mar 3, 2019
>It's strongly typed Sure, it's strongly typed, but I think that's irrelevant, at least if my understanding of the term 'type safe' is correct. From Wikipedia: >In computer science, type safety is the extent to which a programming language discourages or prevents type errors. The thing is, a Python program that causes a type error is valid, even if it crashes. TypeError is strictly a runtime error. To me, that is the epitome of not having type safety. Of course pretty much everything is runtime in Python, by virtue of it being a script language. So you really would need a type checking stage, like TypeScript. But... >mypy adds static typing support too In my opinion, MyPy is not sufficient to represent common usages of Python's type system. Even with the recent addition of structural typing, many Python programs just do things that are no
Read the rest
t easily typed. An example would be, in Django, many things in the core directly patch the Request object, and there's really not a terribly sane way to represent this in a reasonable type system. I feel Python encourages all kinds of type craziness, with metaclasses, 'file-like' objects, etc. Opinions aside... Since MyPy is not part of Python itself (yet?) it is unfair to call the Python language 'type safe' simply by virtue of a type checker existing, for the same reason one wouldn't call JavaScript type safe (I do acknowledge that both of them definitely have a chance of becoming 'official', but neither have yet, and that's the important part.) Not strictly related, but there are also other type checkers, too: At Google, we've got pytype (https://github.com/google/pytype) and Facebook has pyre-check (https://github.com/facebook/pyre-check). I've tried neither myself.
In Pydis: Redis clone in Python 3 to make points about performance

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.