You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I use mypy in --strict mode which also reports when functions are missing type annotations as an error. The extension marks (via red underline) the entire function as erroneous, while it would be easier to understand if only the function definition is marked.
Looking at the logs I see that the end_line and end_character reported by mypy include the entire function scope, so solving this probably requires handling this specific error in a different way.
example:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We avoid re-interpreting responses for the ranges. Users might want to preserve the ranges as provided by mypy. Changing the range would mean that we will now have to provide a way to get the ranges as provided by mypy if users prefer that. This also means that we may have to provided configurability at rule level for each case. Additionally, if mypy makes changes to these ranges, then we will need to handle this on a per version basis.
We want to leave this to mypy to decide how these ranges are managed for the various cases. So, this is an ask for mypy, to change the range here to the function definition.
I use mypy in --strict mode which also reports when functions are missing type annotations as an error. The extension marks (via red underline) the entire function as erroneous, while it would be easier to understand if only the function definition is marked.
Looking at the logs I see that the end_line and end_character reported by mypy include the entire function scope, so solving this probably requires handling this specific error in a different way.
example:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: