4 ms·
It's literally working? What did you expect?
by ipsum2 1y ago
It's literally working? What did you expect?
- koakuma-chan 1y agoMaybe it's working but it's not useful.
- masklinn 1y agoWhat would you expect "useful" to be if your codebase is basically incompatible with type checking?
- koakuma-chan 1y agoI expected that I would be able to run the check command and it would just work. Upon reading the docs, this tool recommends incremental adoption, and after using `--suppress-errors`, `# pyrefly: ignore` is all over my codebase.
- Yossarrian22 1y ago…how else would it work?
- nerdponx 1y agoThat's incremental adoption for adding type hints, not for adopting this particular tool in an already-type-hinted codebase.
- krick 1y agoI know I shouldn't get into this thread, but I'm extremely curious: what did you expect should have happened? I mean, literally, what do you mean by "just work", what work did you expect a type checker to perform if not to show you errors?
- koakuma-chan 1y agoI expected a reasonable amount of reasonable errors, not 60k+ errors most of which are import-error, even though the code runs fine. edit: most errors weren't actually import-error, I just misunderstood --search-path
- fastasucan 1y agoIts the fault of the tool that the codebase had lots of errors?
- koakuma-chan 1y agoI would say it's the fault of the ecosystem. Hopefully it will get better as libraries adopt type hints.
- fastasucan 1y agoWhat does "just work" mean? You are comically obtuse.