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
More and more stubs are "stubtest" complete (not counting pyright and mypy)
1.1. It should be relatively easy to "minimally complete" missing ones using stugben. Especially after the reduction of stubtest false-positives by Stubtest: Improve heuristics for determining whether global-namespace names are imported mypy#14270
1.2. Eventually most if not all stubs will have ignore_missing_stub = false, which could be the only entry under [tool.stubtest]
It's easier to search for ignore_missing_stub = true than to search for a missing line.
None would mean False in the metadata parser. (feels more intuitive?)
I've been wondering about this.
Possible reasons:
1.1. It should be relatively easy to "minimally complete" missing ones using stugben. Especially after the reduction of stubtest false-positives by Stubtest: Improve heuristics for determining whether global-namespace names are imported mypy#14270
1.2. Eventually most if not all stubs will have
ignore_missing_stub = false, which could be the only entry under[tool.stubtest]ignore_missing_stub = truethan to search for a missing line.Nonewould meanFalsein the metadata parser. (feels more intuitive?)Cons: