Python Typing Survey 2025: Code Quality and Flexibility As Top Reasons for Typing Adoption

The 2025 Typed Python Survey, conducted by contributors from JetBrains, Meta, and the broader Python typing community, offers a comprehensive look at the current state of Python’s type system and developer tooling. With 1,241 responses (a 15% increase from last year), the survey captures the evolving sentiment, challenges, and opportunities around Python typing in the [...]
Read More...
The post Python Typing Survey 2025: Code Quality and Flexibility As Top Reasons for Typing Adoption appeared first on Engineering at Meta.

POSTED ON DECEMBER 22, 2025 TO Culture, DevInfra

Python Typing Survey 2025: Code Quality and Flexibility As Top Reasons for Typing Adoption

The 2025 Typed Python Survey, conducted by contributors from JetBrains, Meta, and the broader Python typing community, offers a comprehensive look at the current state of Python’s type system and developer tooling. With 1,241 responses (a 15% increase from last year), the survey captures the evolving sentiment, challenges, and opportunities around Python typing in the open-source ecosystem. In this blog we’ll cover a summary of the key findings and trends from this year’s results.

Who Responded?

The survey was initially distributed on official social media accounts by the survey creators, and subsequently shared organically across further platforms including Reddit, email newsletters, Mastodon, LinkedIn, Discord, and Twitter. When respondents were asked which platform they heard about the survey from, Reddit emerged as the most effective channel, but significant engagement also came from email newsletters and Mastodon, reflecting the diverse spaces where Python developers connect and share knowledge.

The respondent pool was predominantly composed of developers experienced with Python and typing. Nearly half reported over a decade of Python experience, and another third had between five and 10 years. While there was representation from newcomers, the majority of participants brought substantial expertise to their responses. Experience with type hints was similarly robust, with most respondents having used them for several years and only a small minority indicating no experience with typing.

Typing Adoption and Attitudes

The survey results reveal that Python’s type hinting system has become a core part of development for most engineers. An impressive 86% of respondents report that they “always” or “often” use type hints in their Python code, a figure that remains consistent with last year’s Typed Python survey.

For the first time this year the survey also asked participants to indicate how many years of experience they have with Python and with Python typing. We found that adoption of typing is similar across all experience levels, but there are some interesting nuances:

• Developers with 5–10 years of Python experience are the most enthusiastic adopters, with 93% reporting regularly using type hints.

• Among the most junior developers (0–2 years of experience), adoption is slightly lower at 83%. Possible reasons for this could be the learning curve for newcomers (repeatedly mentioned in later survey questions).

• For senior developers (10+ years of experience), adoption was the lowest of all cohorts, with  only 80% reporting using them always or often. Reasons for this drop are unclear, it could reflect more experienced python developers having gotten used to writing Python without type hints before they were supported, or possibly they are more likely to work on larger or legacy codebases that are difficult to migrate.

Percent of respondents who use types “often” or “always,” segmented by years of Python experience.

Overall, the data shows that type hints are widely embraced by the Python community, with strong support from engineers at all experience levels. However, we should note there may be some selection bias at play here, as it’s possible developers who are more familiar with types and use them more often are also more likely to be interested in taking a survey about it.

Why Developers Love Python Typing

When asked what developers loved about the Python type system there were some mixed reactions, with a number of responses just stating, “nothing” (note this was an optional question). This indicates the presence of some strong negative opinions towards the type system among a minority of Python users. The majority of responses were positive, with the following themes emerging prominently:

• Optionality and Gradual Adoption: The optional nature of the type system and the ability to adopt it incrementally into existing projects are highly valued, allowing flexibility in development.

• Improved Readability and Documentation: Type hints serve as in-code documentation, making code clearer and easier to read, understand, and reason about for both the author and other developers, especially in larger codebases.

• Enhanced Tooling and IDE Support: The type system significantly improves IDE features like autocomplete/IntelliSense, jump-to-definition, and inline type hints, leading to a better developer experience.

• Bug Prevention and Code Correctness: It helps catch errors and subtle bugs earlier during development or refactoring, increasing confidence and leading to more robust and reliable code.

• Flexibility and Features: Respondents appreciate the flexibility, expressiveness, and powerful features of the system, including protocols, generics (especially the new syntax), and the ability to inspect annotations at runtime for use with libraries like Pydantic/FastAPI.

Sample of responses to the question, “What do you love about Python Typing?”

Challenges and Pain Points

In addition to assessing positive sentiment towards Python typing, we also asked respondents what challenges and pain points they face. With over 800 responses to the question, “What is the hardest part about using the Python type system?” the following themes were identified:

• Third-Party Library/Framework Support: Many respondents cited the difficulty of integrating types with untyped, incomplete, or incorrect type annotations in third-party libraries (e.g., NumPy, Pandas, Django).

• Complexity of Advanced Features: Advanced concepts such as generics, TypeVar (including co/contravariance), callables/decorators, and complex/nested types were frequently mentioned as difficult to understand or express.

• Tooling and Ecosystem Fragmentation: The ecosystem is seen as chaotic, with inconsistencies between different type checkers (like Mypy and Pyright), slow performance of tools like Mypy, and a desire for an official, built-in type checker.

• Lack of Enforcement and Runtime Guarantees: The fact that typing is optional and is not enforced at runtime or by the Python interpreter makes it harder to convince others to use it, enforce its consistent use, and fully trust the type hints.

• Verbosity and Code Readability: The necessary type hints, especially for complex structures, can be verbose, make the code less readable, and feel non-Pythonic.

• Dealing with Legacy/Dynamic Code: It is hard to integrate typing into old, untyped codebases, particularly when they use dynamic Python features that do not play well with static typing.

• Type System Limitations and Evolution: The type system is perceived as incomplete or less expressive than languages like TypeScript, and its rapid evolution means syntax and best practices are constantly changing.

Most Requested Features

A little less than half of respondents had suggestions for what they thought was missing from the Python type system, the most commonly requested features being:

• Missing Features From TypeScript and Other Languages: Many respondents requested features inspired by TypeScript, such as Intersection types (like the & operator), Mapped and Conditional types, Utility types (like Pick, Omit, keyof, and typeof), and better Structural typing for dictionaries/dicts (e.g., more flexible TypedDict or anonymous types).

[...]

Original source