what module is NoneType in?

[Skaperen]

what module is NoneType in? i didn't find it in the library, language, tutorial, or using documentation or in module "types".

[buran]

Not sure if this answers your question but look at https://docs.python.org/3/library/stdtyp...ull-object

[Gribouillis]

I think it is in module 'builtins' (with an s)

[Skaperen]

Not sure if this answers your question but look at https://docs.python.org/3/library/stdtyp...ull-object

no, it does not even mention it.

---

I think it is in module 'builtins' (with an s)

seems to be the same thing as already there as __builtins__.

[buran]

it does not even mention it.

Well, it does;

The Null Object¶
This object is returned by functions that don’t explicitly return a value. It supports no special operations. There is exactly one null object, named None (a built-in name). type(None)() produces the same singleton.

It is written as None.

[Skaperen]

it doesn't mention "NoneType", which is what i am looking for. see post #1.

[buran]

see the discussion here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/21706626/4046632

[Gribouillis]

However

>>> type(None).__module__
'builtins'

but

>>> __builtins__.NoneType
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: module 'builtins' has no attribute 'NoneType'

Thus NoneType is hidden.

[buran]

>>> __builtins__.type(None)
<class 'NoneType'>

---

Also there is very interesting link in one of the comments in the SO
https://docs.python.org/3/library/typing...pe-aliases

Note that None as a type hint is a special case and is replaced by type(None).

As I understand it, in python3 NoneType is only exposed through type(None)

And the question is why @Skaperen asked this question in the first place as it starts to look very much like XY problem

[Gribouillis]

You're misinterpreting the code

>>> __builtins__.type
<class 'type'>

so __builtins__.type(None) is identical to type(None)

You can add the type yourself

>>> __builtins__.NoneType = type(None)
>>> NoneType
<class 'NoneType'>

This bug report seems worth reading as well.