Small typing annotation fixes #727
Open
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Small fixes for the typing annotations added in #660.
It looks like the above PR included the string literal
'SFType'in a union type to work around a circular use-before-define issue between theSFTypeandSalesforceclasses that reference each other and are both defined inapi.py, but I ran into issues with the typing defined that way (SFTypemethods were not seen as valid when accessingsalesforce.Account.get(), etc.)It seems like the proper way to fix that issue postponed evaluation of type annotations, which I've included in this PR, but it does have possible implications for backwards compatibility.