[deleted messages] Refactor the constant to be able to give a reason #6826
Conversation
Pierre-Sassoulas
added
Needs backport
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 2439084107
💛 - Coveralls |
| old_names: list[tuple[str, str]] = [] | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| _DELETED_MSGID_PREFIXES: list[int] = [] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we underscore this file we can then not underscore anything else in this file 😄
Pierre-Sassoulas
force-pushed
the
refactor-deleted-messages
branch
from
26eba51
to
c1405a9
Compare
Pierre-Sassoulas
force-pushed
the
refactor-deleted-messages
branch
from
c1405a9
to
19410c2
Compare
| # Argparse by default allows abbreviations. It behaves differently | ||
| # if you turn this off, so we also turn it on. We mimick this | ||
| # if you turn this off, so we also turn it on. We mimic this |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry about the unrelated change but I don't know why suddenly pre-commit pylint was not happy about this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I must have a dictionary with both mimic and mimick.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We might want to add to our own dictionary instead of disabling because the useless-suppression it will get annoying fast.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is because you removed a disable on L206.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, I had the useless suppression, thougth it was a spellcheck issue, "fixed" "mimick" (suggestion from IDE) then still had an useless-suppression, and removed the disable. I think it's the dict that has "mimick" in it on ubuntu.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's add useless-suppression to the disable there then. Because the other stuff in that comment still needs to be disabled.
| @@ -1 +1,9 @@ | |||
| bad-option-value:1:0:None:None::Bad option value for enable. Don't recognize message W04044.:UNDEFINED | |||
| bad-option-value:4:0:None:None::Bad option value for disable. Don't recognize message C05048.:UNDEFINED | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you mind doing a follow up PR just before the other PR which changes the confidence for bad-option-value?
Please don't do it in this PR as it already quite large.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah sure, I already have a lot of cherry-pick to do for 2.14.1 anyway 😄
There was a problem hiding this comment.
😅
All good fixes though 😄
|
@Pierre-Sassoulas This breaks |
|
🤖 According to the primer, this change has no effect on the checked open source code. 🤖🎉This comment was generated for commit 19410c2 |
Damn the spellcheck is fragile. It worked locally and in CI. I don't think we can do anything about this, |
Pierre-Sassoulas
added
Backported
and removed
Needs backport
When using pylint v2.14, you can get a bunch of errors like: /action/lib/.automation/.python-lint:1:0: E0015: Unrecognized option found: no-space-check (unrecognized-option) /action/lib/.automation/.python-lint:1:0: R0022: Useless option value for '--disable', 'print-statement' was removed from pylint, see pylint-dev/pylint#4942. (useless-option-value) /action/lib/.automation/.python-lint:1:0: R0022: Useless option value for '--disable', 'parameter-unpacking' was removed from pylint, see pylint-dev/pylint#4942. (useless-option-value) /action/lib/.automation/.python-lint:1:0: R0022: Useless option value for '--disable', 'unpacking-in-except' was removed from pylint, see pylint-dev/pylint#4942. (useless-option-value) Most of them have beed removed here: pylint-dev/pylint#4942 But raising exceptions when using removed options was only added in 2.14 in pylint-dev/pylint#6826 We still need to actualize this config with new options, but at least we won't get errors with this config.
Type of Changes
Description
Refactor prior to #6824 in order to be able to give a reason for why the message was deleted, and better overall organization as deleted messages are not public and specific to
pylint.messages.