-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18.4k
CI: Code checks ensure return status is handled #30457
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CI: Code checks ensure return status is handled #30457
Conversation
Hmm OK - so I guess none of these were doing anything before? Do they all return the same value on failure or is it possible for a -1 return to clash with a +1 return now? |
Yeah I believe these were not doing anything before.. all our other uses of invgrep update RET afterwards. Believe our invgrep only returns [0,1] in
|
OK lgtm then. @datapythonista care to take a look? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Strange that we missed this before, but yes, this seems to make sense.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Strange that we missed this before, but yes, this seems to make sense.
Will merge master once Marc has had a look. (Code checks should then pass since #30455 is now merged) Example with CI failing as expected: https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/runs/362659323#step:4:10 |
Great thanks for taking a look - much appreciated! |
Thanks for spotting and fixing those @alimcmaster1 For reference, this was introduced here: #29318 Not sure if for consistency/clarity we could have a separate error message for each of those, like everywhere else in the file. But not really important. |
Follow up from discussion here. #30370 (comment)
Seems like we are not return the return code of all these code checks - unless I am missing something?
Expected this to fail on master until #30455 is merged
cc. @WillAyd @datapythonista