unidiomatic-typecheck is no longer emitted for in and not in operators
#3522
Conversation
This file contains 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
…n`` operators The original use case for this check was to catch old style type checking idioms such as `type(x) is ...`, but it should not have been extended to handle `in` operators as well. Close #3337
PCManticore
changed the title
unidiomatic-typecheck is no longer emitted for in and not in operatorsin and not in operators
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Steps
doc/whatsnew/<current release.rst>.Description
The original use case for this check was to catch old style type checking idioms
such as
type(x) is ..., but it should not have been extended to handleinoperatorsas well.
Type of Changes
Related Issue
Close #3337