Make @particle_input compatible with from __future__ import annotations
#2479
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
plasmapy.particles
github-actions
bot
added
the
bug
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2479 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 97.37% 97.37% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 104 104
Lines 9401 9399 -2
==========================================
- Hits 9154 9152 -2
Misses 247 247 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ | |||
| from collections.abc import Callable, Iterable, MutableMapping | |||
| from inspect import BoundArguments | |||
| from numbers import Integral, Real | |||
| from typing import Any, Optional, TypedDict, Union | |||
| from typing import Any, Optional, TypedDict, Union, get_type_hints | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ChatGPT suggested using typing.get_type_hints because other methods returned the string representations of the annotations rather than the actual objects. I don't know how long this would have taken me to figure out otherwise!
…ut-from-future-annotations
If postponed evaluation of annotations had become the default in a future version of Python before this was fixed, this would have been an annoying little bug that broke the entire package! 🙃 |
|
@JaydenR2305 — thank you for finding this bug in #2245! It should be fixed once this is merged. |
Description
@JaydenR2305 found a bug that
@particle_inputdid not work on an instance method when preceded byfrom __future__ import annotations, which delays the evaluation of annotations. The purpose of this PR is to fix that bug.However, at the moment I don't actually know how to fix it, so I'm going to start with writing some purposefully failing tests that reproduce the bug, and then try to get it to work somehow.
Wish me luck! 🙃
Related issues
Bug originally observed in #2245.