You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Right now, we have a number of parameters we document in the sphinx docstring, but don't expose as keyword-only on the method signature. The reason for this is because we wanted to let users know these values existed, but we also thought that 99% of users wouldn't care about them. Now, we have a new pylint rule requiring that if something is in the docstring, it has to be in the method signature. Below is a list of the kwargs this rule is affecting, and we'll check them off if we want to keep them in the docstring and add them to the method signature, and no check mark means we'll remove from the docstring
I opened this PR that targets the next versions of pylint and the pylint guidelines checker: #2350
It seems that almost all the new linting errors reference keywords in docstrings that are not in the method signatures. Has there already been a discussion about which ones we want to expose from that list?
cc @msyyc since it looks like you might have already started work on this issue
Right now, we have a number of parameters we document in the sphinx docstring, but don't expose as keyword-only on the method signature. The reason for this is because we wanted to let users know these values existed, but we also thought that 99% of users wouldn't care about them. Now, we have a new pylint rule requiring that if something is in the docstring, it has to be in the method signature. Below is a list of the kwargs this rule is affecting, and we'll check them off if we want to keep them in the docstring and add them to the method signature, and no check mark means we'll remove from the docstring
content_type
in the base function (exposed in overloads)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: