Closed willGraham01 closed 5 months ago
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Project coverage is 90.54%. Comparing base (
3b632c2
) to head (27cdba4
).
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
CodeCov doesn't like my TYPE_CHECKING
imports in files where we don't actually need to instantiate a Path
object.
Happy to change those to regular imports on reviewer's request to avoid the red-cross-of-doom :sweat_smile:
For the TYPE_CHECKING imports I wonder if there's a way to exclude these lines from codecov https://github.com/nedbat/coveragepy/issues/831#issuecomment-517778185?
Went for the straight-up import solution :sweat_smile: The solution given in the linked issue seems to imply that the .coveragerc
file should be on a per-repo basis, and I don't want to escalate this PR to setting a precedent for the whole project. The #pragma: no cov
solution is also ugly to include in each of the blocks (and could very easily get misplaced after a few edits if imports are moved around / changed).
where quotes are no longer needed around the types
VSCode linter why have you forsaken me :sob:
Description
What is this PR
Why is this PR needed?
Standardises our imports of
pathlib
Path
s and avoids importing the whole module when we only need thePath
class.What does this PR do?
Path
tofrom pathlib import Path
across the package.Path
inputs.References
No issues, but picked up on in a comment on https://github.com/brainglobe/brainglobe-utils/pull/65#issuecomment-2046963476
How has this PR been tested?
Tests pass locally. No package functionality should be changed, either.
Is this a breaking change?
No.
Does this PR require an update to the documentation?
N/A
Checklist: