-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
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. Weβll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove old-style classes code, remove check for new-style class #9925
Remove old-style classes code, remove check for new-style class #9925
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #9925 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 95.80% 95.80% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 174 174
Lines 18935 18933 -2
==========================================
- Hits 18141 18139 -2
Misses 794 794
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
tests/functional/i/invalid/invalid_exceptions/invalid_exceptions_raised.py
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's remove them Pierre. OldStyleClass
and NewStyleClass
are no different
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for this. Mind resolving the lints?
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
β¦on 3 is only new style classes)
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
1797367
to
b372a3f
Compare
Thanks for the reviews! Do I need to fix the code coverage failure, too? This PR is removing code. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
No worries on the coverage check, but we do want the docs check to pass: see the git diff it outputs. |
Thanks! Hopefully, that fixes it. Should |
Do I need to worry about the messages on #9925 (comment) ? Is it saying they are caused by my changes? |
I don't think the primer are due to this, they run on the latest commit so when a commit is introduced in the repository we prime this can happen. (#8998) |
I think it's more likely there are unknown bugs in pylint that cause the primer noise; it happens far too frequently for it to be attributed to a project commit changing its packaging to pyproject.toml or whatever happened in that issue. |
May be yeah. The Django errors don't seem to be bugs in Django code. |
Yeah, the no-member for django are expected if we don't use pylint-django. We might want to to our internal own conf for primed project not using pylint that really need a plugin. |
(It's the indeterminacy that's more worrying to me than that.) |
I don't fully understand how the github actions are setup but I think it might be something to do with setting the |
I don't think so, see #9309 for a reproduction. |
May be you found a different issue. I was able to reproduce my issue with and without colorama which made me think we have some bug tied to caching in the workflow. Will try to understand it more. |
Got it, thanks for the investigation. As a debug tool to confirm this I can open a PR later today to fail primer jobs if the full dependencies are not installed ππ» |
Type of Changes
Description
newstyle
attribute forClassDef
instances committed in Remove newstyle variable given old-style class support should be removedΒ astroid#2561, cleaning up pylint code related to that change.new style
wording since there is only one type of class in Python 3 and it has been around for a long time.Refs pylint-dev/astroid#2561