-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
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
False positives for DOC503? #165
Comments
Hi @sondrfos : thank you for finding this issue! Hi @Amar1729 , I was able to reproduce this issue, and I found that it occurred in these lines: pydoclint/pydoclint/utils/return_yield_raise.py Lines 133 to 136 in f758604
Using the example above, Do you have a simply and quick way to fix this? Thanks! |
I do love more edge cases 😉 I'll take a look! |
Any update on this?
I can obviously get around this by importing ConnectError from httpx separately to the rest of the package, but not ideal to have to do so. |
I'm working on a potential solution now, and I'll create a PR soon (in a few days). |
hey @jsh9 sorry for the delay on this. work got a little crazy and i forgot about this notif. just pushed up a change |
I'm encountering what I think is the same issue but am not sure: # test.py
import test2
def func() -> None:
"""
text
Raises:
test2.MyException: exception
"""
try:
x = 1
except test2.MyException:
raise # test2.py
class MyException(Exception):
pass When running pydoclint I get:
|
@Apakottur that is the same issue, thanks for reporting. Looks like that situation isn't caught by my PR; |
Published 0.5.8 on PyPI. |
Hello,
Thank you for maintaining the great tool pydoclint!
We were about to merge 0.5.7 to our project, but it seems as though the newly added rule DOC503 results in some false positives.
Let me try to give a minimal example:
This exception-definition is located in a file called
exceptions.py
Then another file imports the entire
exceptions.py
and uses theCredentialsValidationError
-exception from this fileThis results in a DOC503-error with the message
Is this intended behaviour? Is there somthing here I dont understand?
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: