-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18.4k
TYP: resolve mypy errors in core/arrays/_ranges.py #52943
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
Conversation
pandas/core/arrays/_ranges.py
Outdated
# error: Incompatible return value type (got "signedinteger[_64Bit]", | ||
# expected "int") | ||
return result # type: ignore[return-value] | ||
return int(result) |
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.
Is the result incorrect, or the type-hint incorrect? In general, fixing type-hints shouldn't change behavior. But if this function is supposed to return a Python integer then this is okay.
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.
The function signature is this:
def _generate_range_overflow_safe_signed(
endpoint: int, periods: int, stride: int, side: str
) -> int:
which I interpreted as the function returning a Python integer, would that be correct?
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.
That is one possibility. The other possibility is that the signature is incorrect. Looking at the implementation, it seems clear to me this was meant to return a NumPy integer:
result = np.int64(endpoint) + addend
A look through the git blame shows this function having type-hints added after the initial implementation and prior to it being type-checked (likely because NumPy didn't have type-hints). With all this, it seems much more likely that the signature, and not the implementation, is incorrect.
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.
I see, that makes sense! I've pushed the changes I've made to the function—I was unsure about one thing: in the function _generate_range_overflow_safe
line 160, the variable midpoint
is assigned the result of recursively calling the function, and then repassed in as a parameter. I casted this to an integer to match the function signature, but I wasn't sure if this was the right way to go about it, or if the endpoint
parameter was supposed to be an np.int64
as well. However, in the function, endpoint
is casted to np.int64
, so I assume that the function signature of it being a Python int
is correct.
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.
lgtm
Thank you @jlge! |
* Cast return values to int * Remove mypy error comment * Add return statement to function * Change function signatures * Add type annotation to variables
* Cast return values to int * Remove mypy error comment * Add return statement to function * Change function signatures * Add type annotation to variables
xref #37715
_generate_range_overflow_safe_signed
function toint
to match the function signature