Fix overly strict type assertion #3988
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
tybug
force-pushed
the
fix-type-assertion
branch
2 times, most recently
from
fa096d2
to
beaaa3c
Compare
|
Thank you for correcting my mistake! |
|
Thanks for taking on the typing pull in the first place! 😄 Issues like this are bound to fall out of changes like that. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Regressed in #3961. See recent failure https://github.com/HypothesisWorks/hypothesis/actions/runs/9066538054/job/24909659955 on 5983af0.
new_datacan in fact beOverrun, though it is still safe to setdata = new_databecausedatastarts as> OVERRUNand we maintain anew_data.status >= data.statusinvariant.Some annoying duplicated code here for the
failed_mutationscase to make the type checker happy...cleanest way I could find to do it, but possibly a better way exists.