Skip to content
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

Type annotations for shapes #391

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 6, 2020
Merged

Type annotations for shapes #391

merged 5 commits into from
Jul 6, 2020

Conversation

adam-urbanczyk
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@adam-urbanczyk adam-urbanczyk changed the title Type annotations for shapes [WIP] Type annotations for shapes Jul 4, 2020
@adam-urbanczyk
Copy link
Member Author

I think I'm done. Enough of MyPy for quite some time, but I hope it will be beneficial in the long run.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 4, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #391 into master will decrease coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 94.39%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #391      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   93.42%   93.38%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files          19       19              
  Lines        4925     4976      +51     
  Branches      510      508       -2     
==========================================
+ Hits         4601     4647      +46     
- Misses        204      206       +2     
- Partials      120      123       +3     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
cadquery/cq.py 87.51% <84.21%> (+0.05%) ⬆️
cadquery/occ_impl/shapes.py 90.14% <96.17%> (-0.20%) ⬇️
cadquery/occ_impl/geom.py 88.81% <100.00%> (+0.02%) ⬆️
tests/test_cadquery.py 98.93% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update dd75dcb...97f0dac. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Member

@jmwright jmwright left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it looks good. Thanks for doing this.

@adam-urbanczyk
Copy link
Member Author

One question @jmwright : I fixed CombinedCenterOfBoundBox (it was relying on a method that did not exist) but maybe it is better to completely remove it? No one ever complained about it not working so I guess is is effectively dead.

@jmwright
Copy link
Member

jmwright commented Jul 5, 2020

I'd kind of like to keep it. That's because I've implemented versions of something similar in other apps. I don't think I ever knew that it existed in CQ.

@adam-urbanczyk
Copy link
Member Author

Alright, I'll add a test for it then.

@adam-urbanczyk
Copy link
Member Author

Done, merging.

@adam-urbanczyk adam-urbanczyk merged commit 9808cce into master Jul 6, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants