-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
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
Rough Draft #115
Rough Draft #115
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would suggest breaking this out of the PR and pulling it into main. This adds support for Sphinx autodoc comment strings. Currently it will insert a newline into the docstring formatting without this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thanks! makes sense to me 🙂
Also, I deferred converting |
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #115 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 99.58% 98.66% -0.92%
==========================================
Files 24 24
Lines 1918 1952 +34
==========================================
+ Hits 1910 1926 +16
- Misses 8 26 +18
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
b9c0552
to
6bef529
Compare
33c954e
to
ed9e5e4
Compare
Hey @brentyi!
Here's a rough draft of what we covered in #60. I have to set this down for now but wanted to drop this here in case you could pull it across the finish line 😄
It mostly works. I haven't added tests etc. but did make sure all the existing tests pass. It should provide a decent feel for what we're trying to accomplish. There is still cleanup needed around required field handling and associated help text, lots of testing, etc.
One additional item I added was "HideNoneSubcommands". I think this would be really nice to have as well. For our use case,
None
is only intended as an invalid field that can be overridden (i.e., not used to invalidate an already valid object).Mutual exclusion I took the stance of using defaults, there are probably better ways to enforce this.
Lastly, it seems with the current implementation most of this will need to be constrained to the field list generation. There may be better ways to accomplish this. I had issues with types getting interpreted differently if I tried to resolve it at a higher level (i.e., mainly
field_list_from_callable
).