Conversation
… of a single way that plays better with IDEs
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #29 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 99.92% 99.92% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 53 53
Lines 1300 1299 -1
==========================================
- Hits 1299 1298 -1
Misses 1 1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What this PR does / why do we need it:
We noticed that certain IDEs were complaining about the types returned by the
dsl.DAGanddsl.taskdecorators.At the moment, the same function can be used as a decorator, and as a function that returns a decorator.
This double behavior is achieved with some "smart" if condition that adds complexity to the code and the type system.
This PR simplifies the decorators and adds type hints to them. The result may be a bit more verbose, but it is simpler for both users and maintainers of the library.
Which issue(s) does this PR fix:
Fixes #28
Release Notes
What type of changes to the API does this change introduce?
MAJOR: This PR contains backwards-incompatible changes to the API (e.g. a new required argument was added to a public method)
Checklist