Skip to content
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

Add a check for the proper definition of __all__ #176

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Feb 5, 2022

Conversation

AlexWaygood
Copy link
Collaborator

Fixes #31.

This one was refreshingly easy to implement!

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
__all__: list[str] # Y035 "__all__" in a stub file should be identical to "__all__" at runtime
__all__: list[str] = ["foo", "bar", "baz"]
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There's not really much point in annotating __all__ like this, but I don't really see a good reason to disallow it either.

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

__all__ check
2 participants