Closed
Conversation
Contributor
trexfeathers
left a comment
trexfeathers
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In some places the new formatting looks really horrible, is less readable and seems gratuitous - see the specific sections I have marked. Is there a configuration we can use to make Black less zealous?
Comment on lines
+45
to
+178
| ( | ||
| "first_validity_time", | ||
| ( | ||
| 21, | ||
| 22, | ||
| 23, | ||
| 24, | ||
| 25, | ||
| 26, | ||
| 27, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "last_validity_time", | ||
| ( | ||
| 28, | ||
| 29, | ||
| 30, | ||
| 31, | ||
| 32, | ||
| 33, | ||
| 34, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "misc_validity_time", | ||
| ( | ||
| 35, | ||
| 36, | ||
| 37, | ||
| 38, | ||
| 39, | ||
| 40, | ||
| 41, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "integer_constants", | ||
| ( | ||
| 100, | ||
| 101, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "real_constants", | ||
| ( | ||
| 105, | ||
| 106, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "level_dependent_constants", | ||
| ( | ||
| 110, | ||
| 111, | ||
| 112, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "row_dependent_constants", | ||
| ( | ||
| 115, | ||
| 116, | ||
| 117, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "column_dependent_constants", | ||
| ( | ||
| 120, | ||
| 121, | ||
| 122, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "fields_of_constants", | ||
| ( | ||
| 125, | ||
| 126, | ||
| 127, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "extra_constants", | ||
| ( | ||
| 130, | ||
| 131, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "temp_historyfile", | ||
| ( | ||
| 135, | ||
| 136, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "compressed_field_index1", | ||
| ( | ||
| 140, | ||
| 141, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "compressed_field_index2", | ||
| ( | ||
| 142, | ||
| 143, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "compressed_field_index3", | ||
| ( | ||
| 144, | ||
| 145, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "lookup_table", | ||
| ( | ||
| 150, | ||
| 151, | ||
| 152, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ("total_prognostic_fields", (153,)), | ||
| ("data", (160, 161, 162,)), | ||
| ( | ||
| "data", | ||
| ( | ||
| 160, | ||
| 161, | ||
| 162, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Almost wondering if it's a bug in black? Would anyone really choose this?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bjlittle will likely be able to explain all once he pushes the fixing commit. He does know what's wrong
Comment on lines
+108
to
+138
| ( | ||
| "lbrsvd", | ||
| ( | ||
| 34, | ||
| 35, | ||
| 36, | ||
| 37, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ("lbsrce", (38,)), | ||
| ("lbuser", (39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45,)), | ||
| ("brsvd", (46, 47, 48, 49,)), | ||
| ( | ||
| "lbuser", | ||
| ( | ||
| 39, | ||
| 40, | ||
| 41, | ||
| 42, | ||
| 43, | ||
| 44, | ||
| 45, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "brsvd", | ||
| ( | ||
| 46, | ||
| 47, | ||
| 48, | ||
| 49, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), |
Comment on lines
+193
to
+223
| ( | ||
| "lbrsvd", | ||
| ( | ||
| 34, | ||
| 35, | ||
| 36, | ||
| 37, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ("lbsrce", (38,)), | ||
| ("lbuser", (39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45,)), | ||
| ("brsvd", (46, 47, 48, 49,)), | ||
| ( | ||
| "lbuser", | ||
| ( | ||
| 39, | ||
| 40, | ||
| 41, | ||
| 42, | ||
| 43, | ||
| 44, | ||
| 45, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ( | ||
| "brsvd", | ||
| ( | ||
| 46, | ||
| 47, | ||
| 48, | ||
| 49, | ||
| ), | ||
| ), |
Comment on lines
+354
to
+359
| np.logical_and( | ||
| mask_invert[ | ||
| :-1, | ||
| ], | ||
| diffs_along_y, | ||
| ) |
Comment on lines
+1138
to
+1144
| lat_cube = next( | ||
| self.cube.slices( | ||
| [ | ||
| "grid_latitude", | ||
| ] | ||
| ) | ||
| ) |
Comment on lines
+327
to
+329
| points=[ | ||
| 15, | ||
| ], |
Comment on lines
+227
to
+229
| len( | ||
| set(test_date_ints), | ||
| ), |
Comment on lines
+98
to
+104
| self.assertEqual( | ||
| shape, | ||
| ( | ||
| 2, | ||
| 3, | ||
| ), | ||
| ) |
Comment on lines
+124
to
+130
| self.assertEqual( | ||
| shape, | ||
| ( | ||
| 2, | ||
| 3, | ||
| ), | ||
| ) |
Comment on lines
+110
to
+112
| Index[ | ||
| (2, 0, 1), | ||
| ], |
Member
Author
|
@trexfeathers Yeah, I tend to agree... I am slightly upset with its choices... I'll tinker under the hood and experiment a little with what controls black provides to see if it alleviates these changes. |
Merged
Member
Author
|
@trexfeathers I'm closing this in favour of #3866... it just make life easier 😉 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
🚀 Pull Request
Description
This PR bumps the version of the
blackpre-commit hook, and adds format changes to files for the new version standard.Consult Iris pull request check list