feat: Add flags to replace wrong outputs and fill missing outputs#187
feat: Add flags to replace wrong outputs and fill missing outputs#187augustebaum wants to merge 4 commits intoErotemic:mainfrom
Conversation
|
Note that this PR was produced using LLMs, with heavy editing after. |
|
Still todo:
|
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #187 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 82.07% 82.57% +0.49%
==========================================
Files 28 29 +1
Lines 3549 3701 +152
Branches 736 775 +39
==========================================
+ Hits 2913 3056 +143
- Misses 504 507 +3
- Partials 132 138 +6 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
@Erotemic Feel free to review even if it's still in draft state |
|
Overall it looks like the right place to add the new code. I've never been a huge fan of pytest fixtures, but with AI generated code I think they are fine. Some of the tests added look like they don't do anything: (e.g. We will definitely need tests for pathological cases. Ideally we should get the linter to pass, but I've not been great at maintaining type annotations, so if the mypy issue is truely out of scope we can ignore it. In a future PR I want to use AI to add proper inline type annotations, but based on my experience with other libraries, you have to go slow. It's not good enough to just fix an entire package at this point. I'm also not sure what the pypy error is. I'm testing CI here: #188 if it fails there too when we can conclude it's a different issue. In this PR you will also need to add a CHANGELOG entry. Add it to 1.3.1 for now. |
That's fair; in this case I feel like it could go either way; the code is clearer this way but it wouldn't be so hard to inline them. Let me know.
It turns out these were actual tests, in the form of doctests. I've moved them to their respective functions; sorry for the oversight.
I'd welcome any ideas you have for this; in the meantime I think I'll test the features manually and see if I like the outputs.
I'm actually not sure why the mypy check failed in my PR but not on main. I do in fact get the same errors on main, locally (ran with
The log feels quite far removed from what we're doing in this PR, so I'll keep it for later (if we deal with it at all).
You got it, thanks for the reminder. |
|
@augustebaum Can you rebase on the latest main? I think the CI failure should be fixed. Are you still interested in working towards landing this? |
5baa0d3 to
647f627
Compare
|
Rebased, thanks for the heads-up. I haven't had such a pressing need for this in a while to be honest. In the meantime I've also discovered pytest-accept which I think has a better approach to the problem. I might try to write a plugin for xdoctest over there. If you want to take over / close this PR that's absolutely fine. |
Closes #186