issue_comments

Table actions

3 rows where author_association = "MEMBER" and issue = 965939431 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date)

user 2

issue 1

  • Change annotations to allow str keys · 3 ✖

author_association 1

  • MEMBER · 3 ✖
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
898142259 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5690#issuecomment-898142259 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5690 IC_kwDOAMm_X841iJAz max-sixty 5635139 2021-08-13T02:51:59Z 2021-08-13T02:51:59Z MEMBER

I would suggest that new tests use -> None: so mypy checks them, and we build up some tests for our typing through that — any thoughts?

I'm not opposed to suggesting -> None for tests, but I would hesitate to require it:

* It's not unusual for tests to be incompatible with type checking, e.g., because they are checking invalid input, or rely on tricks like mocks.

* It's also a fair amount of boilerplate to add to code that already has a lot of boilerplate (for things like parametrized tests & fixtures), so readability could suffer.

Suggesting is fine.

I might vote to strongly suggest — it does worry me that a bunch of our type annotations are wrong and we don't have a mechanism to assess that.

But for sure if someone is using mocks etc, then no need. And I'm not suggesting everything (e.g. fixtures) needs to be annotated — adding -> None: will let mypy test the types it already knows about.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Change annotations to allow str keys 965939431
897396180 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5690#issuecomment-897396180 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5690 IC_kwDOAMm_X841fS3U shoyer 1217238 2021-08-12T06:57:56Z 2021-08-12T06:57:56Z MEMBER

I would suggest that new tests use -> None: so mypy checks them, and we build up some tests for our typing through that — any thoughts?

I'm not opposed to suggesting -> None for tests, but I would hesitate to require it: - It's not unusual for tests to be incompatible with type checking, e.g., because they are checking invalid input, or rely on tricks like mocks. - It's also a fair amount of boilerplate to add to code that already has a lot of boilerplate (for things like parametrized tests & fixtures), so readability could suffer.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Change annotations to allow str keys 965939431
897280353 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5690#issuecomment-897280353 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/5690 IC_kwDOAMm_X841e2lh max-sixty 5635139 2021-08-12T01:41:28Z 2021-08-12T01:41:28Z MEMBER

Unfortunately most test files fail mypy when their tests are changed to -> None — which enables mypy. This is mostly because they reuse variables for different types, though on occasion because our typing isn't quite correct.

I would suggest that new tests use -> None: so mypy checks them, and we build up some tests for our typing through that — any thoughts?

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Change annotations to allow str keys 965939431

Advanced export

JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object

CSV options: 

CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] (
   [html_url] TEXT,
   [issue_url] TEXT,
   [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
   [node_id] TEXT,
   [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]),
   [created_at] TEXT,
   [updated_at] TEXT,
   [author_association] TEXT,
   [body] TEXT,
   [reactions] TEXT,
   [performed_via_github_app] TEXT,
   [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id])
);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue]
    ON [issue_comments] ([issue]);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user]
    ON [issue_comments] ([user]);