A new attempt to add type annotations #27
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I'm just going to merge this. It's low-impact and my reluctance to add type annotations has gone down, as things start to stabilise in newer Python versions. |
gotmax23
added a commit
to gotmax23/editables
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2023
Type hints were added in pfmoore#27, but the py.typed file to make tools actually recognize them was not.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I messed up #14 trying to update it.
I've revised my view on type annotations, this now has annotations in the source code, and adds mypy to the lint checks. I'm deliberately not type checking the test directory as the dynamic import hacking is just going to confuse a static checker and I see no reason to enable type checks and then manually disable them again in a big chunk of the code.