-
Couldn't load subscription status.
- Fork 1.6k
Move big rule implementations #18931
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
Move big rule implementations #18931
Conversation
…g-rule-imeplementations
|
|
I let @ntBre have the final review on this. Looks reasonable to me. |
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.
Thank you!
* main: [ty] Add regression-benchmark for attribute-assignment hang (#18957) [ty] Format conflicting types as an enumeration (#18956) [ty] Prevent union builder construction for just one declaration (#18954) [ty] Infer nonlocal types as unions of all reachable bindings (#18750) [`pyflakes`] Mark `F504`/`F522`/`F523` autofix as unsafe if there's a call with side effect (#18839) [`playground`] Add ruff logo docs link to Header.tsx (#18947) [ty] Reduce the overwhelming complexity of `TypeInferenceBuilder::infer_call_expression` (#18943) [ty] Add subdiagnostic about empty bodies in more cases (#18942) [ty] Move search path resolution to `Options::to_program_settings` (#18937) [`flake8-errmsg`] Extend `EM101` to support byte strings (#18867) Move big rule implementations (#18931) [`pylint`] Allow fix with comments and document performance implications (`PLW3301`) (#18936)
Summary
Here's the part that was split out of #18906. I wanted to move these into the rule files since the rest of the rules in
deferred_scope/statementhave that same structure of implementations being in the rule definition file. It also resolves the dilemma of where to put the comment, at least for these rules.Test Plan
N/A, no test/functionality affected