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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Configure and use isort 馃槏 #14

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Oct 8, 2020
Merged

Conversation

copybara-service[bot]
Copy link

Configure and use isort 馃槏

This should, eventually (with e.g. instructions in the contribution section, CI, etc.) make it easier to contribute to refex without breaking any style things. It also resolves a bunch of bad imports that are bad for various reasons (e.g. not moving the raw_ast import when it was renamed to ast_matchers, or stuff about whether typing is a third-party library, or...)

Pretty much everything looks good. Humongous thanks to @timothycrosley and everyone on isort issue #1486.

This also lets me ignore the internal linter that keeps bugging me about where refex imports go. One would imagine they should go in the first-party section -- internal linter doesn't agree (for reasons described in that issue), but it's hard to standardize on a lint-unfriendly order without some tool like isort to help back me up.

@copybara-service copybara-service bot changed the title Configure and use isort 馃槏 Configure and use isort 馃槏 Oct 8, 2020
This should, eventually (with e.g. instructions in the contribution section, CI, etc.) make it easier to contribute to refex without breaking any style things. It also resolves a bunch of bad imports that are bad for various reasons (e.g. not moving the raw_ast import when it was renamed to ast_matchers, or stuff about whether typing is a third-party library, or...)

Pretty much everything looks good. Humongous thanks to @timothycrosley and everyone on [isort issue #1486](PyCQA/isort#1486).

This also lets me ignore the internal linter that keeps bugging me about where refex imports go. One would imagine they should go in the first-party section -- internal linter doesn't agree (for reasons described in that issue), but it's hard to standardize on a lint-unfriendly order without some tool like isort to help back me up.

PiperOrigin-RevId: 336189960
@copybara-service copybara-service bot merged commit f55bd49 into main Oct 8, 2020
@copybara-service copybara-service bot deleted the copybara_332093853 branch October 8, 2020 23:39
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.

None yet

1 participant