Set upper limits on code complexity #6339
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
oz123
approved these changes
Mar 5, 2025
|
@cclauss can you please add a news file? |
|
What new file? |
News . Sorry. |
|
We can add a news fragment if needed on @cclauss 's behalf, but this is a helpful change. |
|
This is failing on GitHub Actions.... New PR on its way to fix this. |
|
@cclauss I have a fix for the ruff issue in the pythonfinder PR if you could port it over to your new PR to fix ruff. |
|
You can choose to merge #6367 or your pythonfinder PR to fix the open ruff issues. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Thank you for contributing to Pipenv!
The issue
Disabling ruff rules PLR0912 and PLR0913 has disabled the limits on code complexity
ruff.lint.pylint.max-args(which has now doubled) andruff.lint.pylint.max-branches(which has increased by 14). Using numbers forces discussion in code reviews about why the increase in complexity is good for the project. Disabling the rules blinds maintainers to pull requests that increase code complexity. Refactoring functions to make them less complex improves the project's maintainability.Upgrade to ruff to the current v0.9.3 and also enforce collapsible-else-if (PLR5501) for fewer lines and less indentation.
The fix
How does this pull request fix your problem? Did you consider any alternatives? Why is this the best solution, in your opinion?
The checklist
news/directory to describe this fix with the extension.bugfix.rst,.feature.rst,.behavior.rst,.doc.rst..vendor.rst. or.trivial.rst(this will appear in the release changelog). Use semantic line breaks and name the file after the issue number or the PR #.