Skip to content
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

Use a tuple for module_parts parameter to facilitate future caching #2516

Merged

Conversation

correctmost
Copy link
Contributor

Type of Changes

Type
🔨 Refactoring

Description

I would like to cache the results of find_module soon. To make that possible, the function parameters will need to be hashable. My plan is to split up the changes to reduce the risk of regressions and to make them easier to review.

This is a follow-up to #2509.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 26, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 92.98%. Comparing base (f924ba2) to head (4316e01).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2516   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   92.98%   92.98%           
=======================================
  Files          93       93           
  Lines       11049    11049           
=======================================
  Hits        10274    10274           
  Misses        775      775           
Flag Coverage Δ
linux 92.85% <100.00%> (ø)
pypy 92.98% <100.00%> (ø)
windows 92.96% <100.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files Coverage Δ
astroid/interpreter/_import/spec.py 97.52% <100.00%> (ø)

@jacobtylerwalls jacobtylerwalls merged commit d8dbc46 into pylint-dev:main Aug 26, 2024
20 checks passed
@correctmost correctmost deleted the cm/use-tuple-for-mod-parts branch August 26, 2024 12:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants