Add check for is comparison with mutable initialisers to rule F632#8607
Merged
charliermarsh merged 3 commits intoastral-sh:mainfrom Nov 11, 2023
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
Contributor
|
Just wondering - what was the original reasoning for not using a |
Member
|
We should probably gate this change to only apply when preview mode is enabled per the versioning policy as I think it fits into
Note on how to do this in another pull request #8608 (comment) |
Member
|
Thanks for contributing :) the rest of the implementation looks good to me. I don't have the answer to your question though. |
Contributor
Author
|
I thiiink I've added the preview flag. And thanks for the encouraging words! |
Closed
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
Adds an extra check to F632 to check for any
iscomparisons to a mutable initialisers.Implements #8589 .
Example:
The if condition will always evaluate to False because it checks on identity and it's impossible to take the same identity as a hard coded list/set/dict initializer.
Multiple test cases were added to ensure the rule works + doesn't flag false positives + the fix works correctly.