-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
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
[pylint
] Add add_argument
utility and autofix for PLW1514
#8928
Merged
Merged
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
25849a4
Add autofix for PLW1514
qdegraaf d4d0b49
Add test and fixture for PY39 or lower case
qdegraaf fec762c
clippy
qdegraaf 5e7be98
Add generic `add_argument` util and replace fix with call to it
qdegraaf afde711
Add no arg fixture
qdegraaf 70bef5c
Handle parentheses
charliermarsh d4c7cca
Fix multi-parentheses
charliermarsh File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
Would this introduce a syntax error if the call contains no arguments? Are you interested in writing a more robust
add_argument
utility, similar to theremove_argument
that exists today?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 it would.
open()
and similar calls all have a required first argument AFAIK but it's still a pretty dirty and unsafe fix.I'd be interested in adding that utility for sure! Will set this to draft and use the autofix as a test case for the utility if there is no urgency behind it.
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.
Awesome, thanks @qdegraaf!
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.
Implemented a coarse first version which only handles keyword arguments, but does check for trailing commas and work with empty calls. It explicitly forbids positional arguments but could still maybe break when adding a first argument to a class instantiation.
I could either use the lexer to check for parentheses and panic if they aren't there and leave the implementation of that to a future PR or implement it in this one. What's your preference? If the latter is preferred, if you happen to know of a rule where something like that happens on which I can test the util in absence of unit test infrastructure let me know.
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.
I think it's fine to leave this as function-only for now, so we can assume the parentheses always exist.