-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 307
Fix a false positive with user-defined Enum class
#1967
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
Conversation
… `enum.Enum`. Calls to `Enum` are now inferred & the qualified name is checked. Refs pylint-dev/pylint#5719
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
DanielNoord
left a comment
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.
I like the test, very elegant!
Couple of nits, rest LGTM!
Co-authored-by: Daniël van Noord <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Daniël van Noord <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Daniël van Noord <[email protected]>
|
Thanks for those suggestions @DanielNoord; nothing I can disagree with there! |
DanielNoord
left a comment
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.
I'd like to see coverage, but other than that this LGTM!
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1967 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 92.63% 92.63% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 94 94
Lines 10869 10885 +16
==========================================
+ Hits 10069 10083 +14
- Misses 800 802 +2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
|
@mbyrnepr2 Do you think you can get the diff coverage to 100% here? |
DanielNoord
left a comment
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 the additional test!
|
The backport to To backport manually, run these commands in your terminal: # Fetch latest updates from GitHub
git fetch
# Create a new working tree
git worktree add .worktrees/backport-maintenance/2.13.x maintenance/2.13.x
# Navigate to the new working tree
cd .worktrees/backport-maintenance/2.13.x
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport-1967-to-maintenance/2.13.x
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 c267397eda848544bcbea04e889815ac4faa6ba8
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport-1967-to-maintenance/2.13.x
# Go back to the original working tree
cd ../..
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove .worktrees/backport-maintenance/2.13.xThen, create a pull request where the |
|
@mbyrnepr2 Could you try and backport this? For some reason |
Co-authored-by: Daniël van Noord <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit c267397)
|
Done @DanielNoord: #1971. Let me know if any issues. |
|
Thanks! I feel bad for asking, but could you do #1970 as well? 😄 It's my own PR but I haven't been able to fix the broken |
Co-authored-by: Daniël van Noord <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit c267397)
Type of Changes
Description
Closes pylint-dev/pylint#5719