Skip to content
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

CI: fix mypy complaint introduced in #29873 #29891

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 27, 2019

Conversation

jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member

@jreback the pertinent delete methods are never hit in tests. any chance we can rip them out?

@simonjayhawkins simonjayhawkins changed the title CI: fix mypy complaint introeuced in #29873 CI: fix mypy complaint introduced in #29873 Nov 27, 2019
@simonjayhawkins simonjayhawkins added CI Continuous Integration Typing type annotations, mypy/pyright type checking labels Nov 27, 2019
@simonjayhawkins simonjayhawkins added this to the 1.0 milestone Nov 27, 2019
@jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member Author

the pertinent delete methods are never hit in tests. any chance we can rip them out?

If delete and remove are considered private, then the answer should be yes. delete is only ever called by remove, and remove is only ever called with kwargs such that it never calls delete

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Nov 27, 2019

the .delete method you just annotated is likely abstract so yes.

.remove is public and calls the .delete method on the storer

@jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member Author

.remove is public and calls the .delete method on the storer

Darn. If we could remove where, start, stop from the signature (in tests these are never passed) we could rule out delete ever getting called.

Anyway, this should fix the CI

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Nov 27, 2019

k merge on green.

@jbrockmendel
Copy link
Member Author

py36 failure is due to a 0.1 microsecond lag between calls, should be ignored

@jreback
Copy link
Contributor

jreback commented Nov 27, 2019

py36 failure is due to a 0.1 microsecond lag between calls, should be ignored

this is the now comparison test? let's just change that test to be better

@jreback jreback merged commit d338b94 into pandas-dev:master Nov 27, 2019
@jbrockmendel jbrockmendel deleted the follow29873 branch November 27, 2019 19:07
keechongtan added a commit to keechongtan/pandas that referenced this pull request Nov 29, 2019
…ndexing-1row-df

* upstream/master: (32 commits)
  DEPR: Series.cat.categorical (pandas-dev#29914)
  DEPR: infer_dtype default for skipna is now True (pandas-dev#29876)
  Fix broken asv (pandas-dev#29906)
  DEPR: Remove weekday_name (pandas-dev#29831)
  Fix mypy errors for pandas\tests\series\test_operators.py (pandas-dev#29826)
  CI: Setting path only once in GitHub Actions (pandas-dev#29867)
  DEPR: passing td64 data to DTA or dt64 data to TDA (pandas-dev#29794)
  CLN: remove unsupported sparse code from io.pytables (pandas-dev#29863)
  x.__class__ TO type(x) (pandas-dev#29889)
  DEPR: ftype, ftypes (pandas-dev#29895)
  REF: use named funcs instead of lambdas (pandas-dev#29841)
  Correct type inference for UInt64Index during access (pandas-dev#29420)
  CLN: follow-up to 29725 (pandas-dev#29890)
  CLN: trim unnecessary code in indexing tests (pandas-dev#29845)
  TST added test for groupby agg on mulitlevel column (pandas-dev#29772) (pandas-dev#29866)
  mypy fix (pandas-dev#29891)
  Typing annotations (pandas-dev#29850)
  Fix mypy error in pandas/tests.indexes.test_base.py (pandas-dev#29188)
  CLN: remove never-used kwargs, make kwargs explicit (pandas-dev#29873)
  TYP: Added typing to __eq__ functions (pandas-dev#29818)
  ...
proost pushed a commit to proost/pandas that referenced this pull request Dec 19, 2019
proost pushed a commit to proost/pandas that referenced this pull request Dec 19, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CI Continuous Integration Typing type annotations, mypy/pyright type checking
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants