python language updates #1922
python language updates #1922
Conversation
upgraded a bunch of format strings to f-strings formatted with black afterwards to meet previous style all tests pass (Windows 11)
|
@marksmayo Thanks for your PR! The Flake8 test seems to be failing due to overly complicated / redundant string concatenation, more info here. If you could fix those, that'd be great. |
|
I don't know why the black check didn't end up failing for your PR because it did for the most recent previous ones, but either way: it might make sense to update to the latest commit on |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
these top-level files shouldn't be commited, right?
| f"Error in file {self.filename}, " | ||
| + f"Accessing time t={tt[0]:.02f}-{tt[-1]:.02f} seconds, " | ||
| + f"with clip duration={self.duration:f} seconds, " |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you could avoid the + and as the concatenation will be implicit
https://docs.python.org/3/reference/lexical_analysis.html#string-literal-concatenation
| f"Error in file {self.filename}, " | ||
| + f"At time t={tt[0]:.02f}-{tt[-1]:.02f} seconds, " | ||
| + "indices wanted: %d-%d, " % (indices.min(), indices.max()) | ||
| + "but len(buffer)=%d\n" % (len(self.buffer)) | ||
| + f"but len(buffer)={len(self.buffer)}\n" |
|
I'm confused about how someone who isn't a maintainer of the project (as far as I can see) ended up as a reviewer for this PR – and without GitHub providing any meta info on that, no less (normally, it should say something like "X requested a review by Y" or similar, no?) – or why they were allowed to approve the changes. Very curious. To clarify, I'm talking about the review from 1 March. |
upgraded a bunch of format strings to f-strings
formatted with black afterwards to meet previous style
all tests pass (Windows 11)