Fix pylint false positives for ThreadPoolExecutor#4244
Fix pylint false positives for ThreadPoolExecutor#4244srikaaviya wants to merge 1 commit intoopen-telemetry:mainfrom
Conversation
3d58728 to
bdd972d
Compare
xrmx
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think this is the right way to fix this. We should fix all the issue we have with a newer pylint version and then remove the comments.
|
|
||
| # from concurrent.futures import ( # pylint: disable=no-name-in-module; TODO #4199 | ||
| # ThreadPoolExecutor, | ||
| # ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do we need this commented out ? can we just remove it ? here and everywhere else ?
|
I agree with @xrmx in that we should bump the pylint version instead of using the fully qualified names. |
bdd972d to
59e2617
Compare
|
@xrmx @DylanRussell @JWinermaSplunk I bumped pylint to 4.0.5, as anticipated, the upgrade surfaces 41 lint job failures across the repo. Should I address them in this PR? What would you recommend? |
I would start by changing the pylint configuration to: And then re-evaluate what's left. I see there are files with 12 or even 18 occurrences but there would probably good to add a local comment to disable the warnings. |
Description
This PR changes the
concurrent.futuresimport style in three files to bypass a knownno-name-in-modulepylint parsing bug introduced when adding Python 3.14 support.By using
import concurrent.futuresand fully qualifyingconcurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutorandconcurrent.futures.Future, we cleanly resolve the false positive without needing any# pylint: disablecomments or global config overrides.Fixes #4199
Type of change
How Has This Been Tested?
The official tox linting suites passed successfully:
Does This PR Require a Core Repo Change?
No.
Checklist: