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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
[mypy] Enforcing typing for superset.dashboards #9418
[mypy] Enforcing typing for superset.dashboards #9418
Changes from 1 commit
67146c4
96cb335
9585392
9962c2c
ac53820
d9e2180
c18dd50
7ab7f96
ce6b62e
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this be
Optional[Model]
per #9416? Note I presume that therun
methods should have consistent return type.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My take is that the abstract is defined has
Optional[Model]
and the implementations can returnNone
orModel
. If we set (for example)create.run
-> Optional[Model]` then I should check for the model's existence on the return from: https://github.com/apache/incubator-superset/blob/master/superset/dashboards/api.py#L164.And I'm assuming that the commands succeed and return or raise. What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On the other hand we can make them more coherent and always expect
Optional[Model]
this can make future implementation more safely "blind" to the command ifself, just runrun
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I prefer the later, i.e., all the
run
signatures having the same return type. It helps to ensures consistency both now and for future classes.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ended up reverting typing on command to a more explicit type, following @villebro comments and reasoning around:
Command.run()
will vary a lotOptional[Model]
will not cover all future use cases and will force us to implement logic that is unnecessary such has testing if therun
method returned something, when it will always return of raiseCommand.run()
unless creating a very big type definitionThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dpgaspar would you mind updating this line as well to ensure consistency?