Update pyupgrade config for Python 3.9 #9987
Conversation
| # NOTE: The guard for Python 3.9 is because types.GenericAlias is only added in Python 3.9. This is not a problem | ||
| # as the syntax is added in the same version in the first place. | ||
| if (3, 9) <= sys.version_info < (3, 11) and isinstance(annotation, types.GenericAlias): | ||
| if sys.version_info < (3, 11) and isinstance(annotation, types.GenericAlias): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@auvipy Can you please give more details? This upper version limit is not something I touch with this PR and I don't know much about why it's implemented.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It appears only this was removed:
# NOTE: The guard for Python 3.9 is because types.GenericAlias is only added in Python 3.9. This is not a problem
# as the syntax is added in the same version in the first place.
if (3, 9) <=Which matches the scope of the PR. Anything we’re missing @auvipy ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am considering whether we need to revert this specific change @ulgens .
Original code:
def annotation_is_class(annotation: typing.Any) -> bool:
"""Test if a given annotation is a class that can be used in isinstance()/issubclass()."""
# isclass() returns True for generic type hints (e.g. `list[str]`) until Python 3.10.
# NOTE: The guard for Python 3.9 is because types.GenericAlias is only added in Python 3.9. This is not a problem
# as the syntax is added in the same version in the first place.
if (3, 9) <= sys.version_info < (3, 11) and isinstance(annotation, types.GenericAlias):This is mostly a safeguard, a functionality, that we might actually want to keep for a few more years until Python 3.9 is really out of the game, or, if we officially drop existing support for edge cases, which I prefer not to, at this moment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Nusnus The change doesn't affect the use of 3.9, it's for anything earlier than 3.9. Because 3.9 is the earliest supported version, (3, 9) <= sys.version _info will always be true - it doesn't need to be checked.
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #9987 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 78.68% 78.68%
=======================================
Files 153 153
Lines 19330 19337 +7
Branches 2221 2220 -1
=======================================
+ Hits 15209 15215 +6
Misses 3824 3824
- Partials 297 298 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Nusnus
left a comment
Nusnus
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for this PR!
LGTM so far, though we’ll need to wait before deprecating 3.9 in main.
|
@Nusnus Thank you. To clarify, this PR doesn't serve to the deprecation of 3.9 - it cleans residues from <3.9 support and can be merged safely in the current release. |
These were added in * celery@f1ddd58 * celery@c4e4bab but they are not helpful. Decided to clean in celery#9987 (comment)
These were added in * f1ddd58 * c4e4bab but they are not helpful. Decided to clean in #9987 (comment)
ulgens
force-pushed
the
pyupgrade-python-3.9
branch
from
9fe86c9 to
afb57e4
Compare
It seems this wasn't handled during 3.8 removal
ulgens
force-pushed
the
pyupgrade-python-3.9
branch
from
afb57e4 to
06ab87f
Compare
|
@Nusnus Is there any chance to handle this in 5.6.0? |
3 participants
Description
Update pyupgrade config for Python 3.9. It seems this wasn't handled during 3.8 removal.