feat: Adds support for PEP-649 via type-checking-py314plus setting.#207
Merged
feat: Adds support for PEP-649 via type-checking-py314plus setting.#207
type-checking-py314plus setting.#207Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #207 +/- ##
=====================================
Coverage 96.4% 96.4%
=====================================
Files 4 4
Lines 959 968 +9
=====================================
+ Hits 925 934 +9
Misses 34 34
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Closes #206
This adds a new setting
type-checking-py314plusfor enabling PEP-649 semantics when analyzing annotations.Currently this setting has the same effect as adding a
from __future__ import annotationsimport to every file we're analyzing, although in the future the detailed semantics may diverge ever so slightly, if necessary.We may also consider adding a rule for removing
from __future__ import annotationsimports when Python 3.14+ mode is active, although that is a little more controversial, since the runtime behavior is still different in 3.14+ when that import is present, so removing it can cause subtle breakages in code that was previously working, albeit only rarely. That rule may also overlap with other plugins, since there are already other plugins for removing outdated futures imports.