Some config changes were made in upstream packages which caused mypy testing to be more extensive in downstream pkgs (e.g., mirgecom), resulting in some new errors. Some of these errors were legit documentation foibles. Some appeared to be spurious complaints about using DOFArray's in mathematical expressions.
The errors in mirgecom/profiling.py are simply ignored globally for now using the change in setup.cfg. Since those errors appear to be legit problems in keeping our profiling module up-to-date with the underlying upstream API, and not simply mypy errors. mirgecom/profiling.py should be modernized in a different, dedicated PR.
In short, this change set addresses the new mypy failures that resulted from more extensive testing.
Questions for the review:
[ ] Is the scope and purpose of the PR clear?
[ ] The PR should have a description.
[ ] The PR should have a guide if needed (e.g., an ordering).
[ ] Is every top-level method and class documented? Are things that should be documented actually so?
[ ] Is the interface understandable? (I.e. can someone figure out what stuff does?) Is it well-defined?
[ ] Does the implementation do what the docstring claims?
[ ] Is everything that is implemented covered by tests?
[ ] Do you see any immediate risks or performance disadvantages with the design? Example: what do interface normals attach to?
Some config changes were made in upstream packages which caused mypy testing to be more extensive in downstream pkgs (e.g., mirgecom), resulting in some new errors. Some of these errors were legit documentation foibles. Some appeared to be spurious complaints about using
DOFArray's in mathematical expressions.The errors in
mirgecom/profiling.pyare simply ignored globally for now using the change insetup.cfg. Since those errors appear to be legit problems in keeping our profiling module up-to-date with the underlying upstream API, and not simply mypy errors.mirgecom/profiling.pyshould be modernized in a different, dedicated PR.In short, this change set addresses the new mypy failures that resulted from more extensive testing.
Questions for the review: