Aspirational lints

[Yoshanuikabundi]

These are lints I'd like the codebase to one day pass. I expect they don't pass now. Mostly stolen from Interchange.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #264 (647041d) into main (0ca1eb4) will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is 99.09%.

Additional details and impacted files

[mattwthompson]

This is super duper in my wheelhouse; if you'd like feedback at any point I'm happy to oblige

[Yoshanuikabundi]

Thanks Matt, will let you know - I just saw the trailing commas pre-commit on Interchange and was like "I WANT THAT" 😆

If you have feedback in mind I obvs want to hear it but I'm assuming you know that and are offering a more formal review at some point, in which case I appreciate it and will let you know 😁

[mattwthompson]

Hot dang, I did some stuff and it worked

[Yoshanuikabundi]

Holy crap go @mattwthompson!

Are there any change or commits or files that have been manually edited, or is this all automatic changes from lints? It looks amazing! I guess you dropped interrogate coz we're a long way off being full of docstrings?

[mattwthompson]

Some of the documentation changes in 26d9f53 are manual, but I tried to make no or minimal changes to the source code. I think my likely errors here, if any, or the sort of things to look out if it were possible to review this, are inaccurate statements in some docstrings. Given that (to my surprise) tests are passing I think the chances I broke something are low; adding a type checker is arguably a better way to review this than reading so many LOC.

I guess you dropped interrogate coz we're a long way off being full of docstrings?

I dropped it because I forgot why I had it in Interchange in the first place. We could add it back in and see what happens - pydocstyle complains when anything public lacks a docstring, so I bet the coverage is actually quite good.

[mattwthompson]

This was fun to work on but it doesn't seem valued - if anybody wishes to pick this up, I'm leaving the branch dangling on the remote