-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 814
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
feat[tool]: separate import resolution pass #4229
feat[tool]: separate import resolution pass #4229
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #4229 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 91.35% 48.73% -42.62%
===========================================
Files 109 109
Lines 15637 15692 +55
Branches 3443 3452 +9
===========================================
- Hits 14285 7648 -6637
- Misses 920 7438 +6518
- Partials 432 606 +174 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
…ort-resolution-pass
…ort-resolution-pass
|
||
# load an InterfaceT or ModuleInfo from an import. | ||
# raises FileNotFoundError | ||
def _load_import(self, node: vy_ast.VyperNode, level: int, module_str: str, alias: str) -> Any: |
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.
can we name module_str
as qualified_name
(or qualified_module_name
), which better conveys the semantics and is consistent with the previous naming?
contains bugs as per #4268. we probably should merge and fix within the mentioned PR |
no new tests - i see that we mainly shuffled code around, but we should carefully analyze coverage before merging (we should fix the rate limits for codecov while we're at it) |
since codecov isn't working properly, I went over the coverage locally:
edit: fixed link |
What I did
separate import resolution into its own pass
How I did it
How to verify it
Commit message
Description for the changelog
Cute Animal Picture