Static checkers refactor #30
Open
Conversation
This file contains 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Hi Sander,
In the past we discussed static checkers and whether we should gradually include them in pulse_lib as well. To show you what we are currently doing in our repo's I have added the static checks that we are currently using (flake, black, pylint, mypy) and refactored the qblox_fast_scans to be compliant (only 1d, in a separate file). I kept everything backwards compatible and checked if the example behaved the same as before.
Please have a look and let me know if this is a direction you would like to follow (gradually of course ;))