Sourcery refactored main branch

[sourcery-ai]

Branch main refactored by Sourcery.

If you're happy with these changes, merge this Pull Request using the Squash and merge strategy.

See our documentation here.

Run Sourcery locally

Reduce the feedback loop during development by using the Sourcery editor plugin:

• VS Code
• PyCharm

Review changes via command line

To manually merge these changes, make sure you're on the main branch, then run:

git fetch origin sourcery/main
git merge --ff-only FETCH_HEAD
git reset HEAD^

Help us improve this pull request!

[sourcery-ai]

Function _PathMagic.set.magic refactored with the following changes:

• Remove unnecessary call to keys() (remove-dict-keys)

[sourcery-ai]

Function JsonWrapper.set refactored with the following changes:

• Replace multiple comparisons of same variable with in operator (merge-comparisons)

[sourcery-ai]

Function JsonWrapper.get refactored with the following changes:

• Replace multiple comparisons of same variable with in operator (merge-comparisons)

[sourcery-ai]

Function JsonWrapper.rem refactored with the following changes:

• Replace multiple comparisons of same variable with in operator (merge-comparisons)

[sourcery-ai]

Function JsonWrapper.nuke refactored with the following changes:

• Replace multiple comparisons of same variable with in operator (merge-comparisons)

[sourcery-ai]

Sourcery Code Quality Report

✅  Merging this PR will increase code quality in the affected files by 0.36%.

Quality metrics	Before	After	Change
Complexity	4.53 ⭐	4.30 ⭐	-0.23 👍
Method Length	39.88 ⭐	39.12 ⭐	-0.76 👍
Working memory	5.81 ⭐	5.76 ⭐	-0.05 👍
Quality	81.05% ⭐	81.41% ⭐	0.36% 👍

Other metrics	Before	After	Change
Lines	258	258	0

Changed files	Quality Before	Quality After	Quality Change
json_wrapper.py	81.05% ⭐	81.41% ⭐	0.36% 👍

Here are some functions in these files that still need a tune-up:

File	Function	Complexity	Length	Working Memory	Quality	Recommendation

Legend and Explanation

The emojis denote the absolute quality of the code:

• ⭐ excellent
• 🙂 good
• 😞 poor
• ⛔ very poor

The 👍 and 👎 indicate whether the quality has improved or gotten worse with this pull request.

---

Please see our documentation here for details on how these metrics are calculated.

We are actively working on this report - lots more documentation and extra metrics to come!

Help us improve this quality report!