-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Reduce false positives from Y052 #492
Conversation
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
(Was hoping this would mean we wouldn't have to have so many |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
1 similar comment
⚠ Flake8 diff showing the effect of this PR on typeshed: > ./stubs/shapely/shapely/_geometry.pyi:165:23: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/_geometry.pyi:166:20: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/_geometry.pyi:167:25: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/constructive.pyi:42:16: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/constructive.pyi:43:15: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/constructive.pyi:44:17: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/constructive.pyi:47:16: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/constructive.pyi:48:16: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/constructive.pyi:49:16: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/io.pyi:21:19: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/io.pyi:22:14: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/strtree.pyi:18:21: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/strtree.pyi:19:17: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/strtree.pyi:20:19: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/strtree.pyi:21:19: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/strtree.pyi:22:18: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/strtree.pyi:23:18: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/strtree.pyi:24:17: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/strtree.pyi:25:21: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations
> ./stubs/shapely/shapely/strtree.pyi:26:28: NQA102 "# noqa: Y052" has no matching violations |
Ready for review. As well as the typeshed_primer diff above, this would also allow us to get rid of this per-file-ignore entry: https://github.com/python/typeshed/blob/0b1259ca0c582a7fa6c125bea1dbe22c44a44af4/.flake8#L11-L14. It's not the most principled of approaches, but I think it's probably preferable to the amount of noqas we currently have to do for enum classes in typeshed. (Another alternative is just to deprecate Y052, of course.) |
No description provided.