Conversation
|
Thanks for the proposal!
Can I nitpick the naming a bit? I don't see how "default" is meaningful here. Oh, I think I see. It's the default style if it's not further customized? That feels like an unlikely scenario. I'd suggest just As for "mypy" and "pytest" - those also feel a little disconnected from the user's intent. A user unfamiliar with this pull request or linked issue is going to be unlikely to know what "mypy" means as a report style, same for "pytest". In fact, the "pytest" style is a bit of a misnomer as the pytest convention in other tools is to report the relative path in the message (I think). I'd rather see something closer to the user's intent, like "inline"/"hidden" or "show"/"hide" or "quiet"/"verbose". |
Exactly... This controls the behavior of I suppose I could live with
That's fair. I think we should address this with documentation (e.g. additional help text).
Note that I wasn't really going for "the style that other plugins which integrate static checkers use" as much as 'the style that core uses". Also, for what it's worth, I have issue #23 in the back of my mind for the |
I think that's a good point, particularly for the "pytest" name, so I ended up renaming it "no-path". |
|
Oops... helps if I actually commit the changes 😅 |
Resolve #90
no-pathstyle is still the default.mypystyle returns the lines unaltered (i.e. exactly howmypycreated them).