issue_comments: 798771631

This data as json

html_url issue_url id node_id user created_at updated_at author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/4904#issuecomment-798771631 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4904 798771631 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc5ODc3MTYzMQ== 32801740 2021-03-13T19:24:08Z 2021-03-13T19:25:00Z CONTRIBUTOR

You can now view the branch I mentioned in my previous message at https://github.com/pydata/xarray/compare/master...rhkleijn:gen-ops . It would get rid of the need for dynamically generating (injecting) unary and binary operators at runtime.

Note that its script generates both the module containing the arithmetic methods and its accompanying stub file. This setup turned out to be more robust than both:

  • the approach taken in this PR so far (dynamically adding the methods at runtime and generating only a stub file). PyCharm would be happy with the typing information but it turns out that it does complain about missing methods.
  • directly attaching the typing information to the methods in the generated module. I have tried it but PyCharm would not handle the @overloads correctly in that case.

In all cases mypy and pylance work nicely.

I prefer the rhkleijn:gen-ops branch over the rhkleijn:ops-typing branch on which this PR is based, but I am curious to hear your opinions and further guidance on it.

Also, I am not sure what to do with the rhkleijn:gen-ops branch. Should I open a new (draft) PR here from the rhkleijn:gen-ops branch or would it be better to merge it into rhkleijn:ops-typing so it would appear here in this PR?

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   807764700