TYP: clean for PY3.8 (final) #42422
TYP: clean for PY3.8 (final) #42422
Conversation
pandas/_libs/internals.pyi
Outdated
|
|
||
| class NumpyBlock(SharedBlock): | ||
| values: np.ndarray | ||
| # @final # not useful in cython, but we _would_ annotate with @final |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jbrockmendel i've moved the comment from the cython since the final decorator could be added to the stub so the comment is not relevant.
However, we can't add to the stub as it is overridden in subclass in pandas/core/internals/blocks.py
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sounds like it is inaccurate so should be removed anyway
pandas/core/internals/blocks.py
Outdated
| values: np.ndarray | ||
|
|
||
| getitem_block_index = libinternals.NumpyBlock.getitem_block_index | ||
| getitem_block_index = final(libinternals.NumpyBlock.getitem_block_index) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jbrockmendel why is the override needed? is this a cython class thing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IIRC this was to make mypy happy
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the mypy errors are...
pandas/core/internals/blocks.py:1661: error: Definition of "getitem_block_index" in base class "NumpyBlock" is incompatible with definition in base class "Block" [misc]
pandas/core/internals/blocks.py:1670: error: Definition of "getitem_block_index" in base class "NDArrayBackedBlock" is incompatible with definition in base class "Block" [misc]
Found 2 errors in 1 file (checked 1299 source files)
they aren't needed. fixed up mypy error by moving remaining Python implementation of getitem_block_index from Block to ExtensionBlock and added @final to stub instead.
Also added @final to Python implementation of getitem_block_index for consistency.
pandas/core/indexes/datetimelike.py
Outdated
| Callable, | ||
| final, | ||
| ) | ||
| from pandas._typing import Callable |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this looks iffy. we look at this independently and see if this occurs elsewhere.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
did this get resolved? if so, LGTM
|
can you rebase |
4 participants
No description provided.