Reharmonize TCH* rules with flake8-type-checking
#9573
Comments
|
I think this makes sense, I don't know if it will be part of 0.2.0 or not. \cc @zanieb |
charliermarsh
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 31, 2024
## Summary This rule was added to `flake8-type-checking` as `TC010`. We're about to stabilize it, so we might as well use the correct code. See: #9573.
zanieb
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 1, 2024
## Summary This rule was added to `flake8-type-checking` as `TC010`. We're about to stabilize it, so we might as well use the correct code. See: #9573.
zanieb
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 1, 2024
## Summary This rule was added to `flake8-type-checking` as `TC010`. We're about to stabilize it, so we might as well use the correct code. See: #9573.
|
@AlexWaygood Could we fit this into the 0.8.0 release (i.e. renaming Otherwise I will need to wait until the I'm happy to open a PR myself. |
|
@Daverball unfortunately I'm already somewhat behind on my tasks for this release, so I won't be able to work on this myself. I'd be very happy to review a PR targeting the I can't immediately find the PRs in the past where we've remapped rules, but there have been some -- if you can find them, they should be a good template to use |
|
This change will be released as part of Ruff 0.8 |
MichaReiser
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Nov 19, 2024
AlexWaygood
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Nov 19, 2024
MichaReiser
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Nov 20, 2024
MichaReiser
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Nov 20, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
There recently have been a whole bunch of contributions to flake8-type-checking made by yours truly which greatly decreased the rate of false positives/negatives and added new rules, as well as better support for SQLAlchemy.
Ruff independently added one of the rules which is slated to be added to
flake8-type-checkingin the next release as TC010 (string union syntax), whereas in Ruff the rule is TCH006.Considering there's no longer a naming conflict in the
TC*range (tryceratops kindly changed its code to match ruff's) I would suggest deprecating theTCH*rules and keep aliases around for backwards compatibility. At the same time we can reharmonize the rule numbering and makeTCH006alias toTC010.I can take a stab at porting some of the improvements from
flake8-type-checkingto Ruff, although I'm still a Rust novice, so I can't guarantee I will be able to contribute in a meaningful manner any time soon.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: