flake8-noqa reports unused noqa comments in generated protobuf stubs

[AlexWaygood]

I recently tried running flake8 on typeshed with the flake8-noqa plugin installed, to see if we had any unnecessary noqa comments lying around. Among several other hits (some of which were fixed in python/typeshed#8639), flake8-noqa reported the following:

stubs\protobuf\google\protobuf\struct_pb2.pyi:55:133: NQA102 "# noqa: F821" has no matching violations
stubs\protobuf\google\protobuf\type_pb2.pyi:56:127: NQA102 "# noqa: F821" has no matching violations

These noqa comments do indeed seem to be unnecessary when using the latest version of flake8.

flake8-relevant details of my local environment:

flake8==5.0.4
flake8-bugbear==22.7.1
flake8-noqa==1.2.9
flake8-pyi==22.8.1

(This doesn't need to be high priority. For several other reasons, I think it's unlikely we'll be able to enable flake8-noqa's NQA102 in CI at typeshed right now, anyway 🙂)

[nipunn1313]

The #noqa was for PyCQA/flake8-pyi#278 - maybe flake8 fixed it? Will poke around when I get some time.

[nipunn1313]

Interestingly, it seems like flake8 understands forward references if the class is at module scope.

However if the class is an inner class within another class, then flake8 does not understand the forward reference.

I can probably update mypy-protobuf to emit a #noqa in the inner scope ones but not the module scope ones.

Still seems like a bug in flake8! (PyCQA/flake8-pyi#278)

[AlexWaygood]

Thanks for the quick response on this @nipunn1313!