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
DN-37738: investigate downstream CI failure due to typing #3
Conversation
f64af0c
to
d9333a5
Compare
d9333a5
to
db31d2a
Compare
SQLAlchemy now defines ColumnElement as generic, and we don't really want to make use of that since we usually hold columns in heterogeneous containers (I imagine this typing is much more useful for the ORM). In most contexts, not providing a type variable is interpreted as ColumnElement[Any], but it seems to be causing trouble here in inheritance involving Generic, as it makes Python want the Generic to include the typevar for ColumnElement.
Codecov ReportBase: 97.11% // Head: 97.11% // No change to project coverage 👍
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.11% 97.11%
=======================================
Files 15 15
Lines 1246 1246
Branches 117 117
=======================================
Hits 1210 1210
Misses 19 19
Partials 17 17 Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
55e9d27
to
71f663a
Compare
@@ -532,6 +534,7 @@ def _select_to_executable( | |||
`to_payload` for all other relation types. | |||
""" | |||
columns_available: Mapping[ColumnTag, _L] | None = None | |||
executable: sqlalchemy.sql.Select | sqlalchemy.sql.CompoundSelect |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Are we only supporting python 3.10 now?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, daf_relation has been 3.10-only from its inception.
Checklist
[ ] ran Jenkinsskipped because this only touches type annotationsdoc/changes