Sourcery refactored main branch

[sourcery-ai]

Branch main refactored by Sourcery.

If you're happy with these changes, merge this Pull Request using the Squash and merge strategy.

See our documentation here.

Run Sourcery locally

Reduce the feedback loop during development by using the Sourcery editor plugin:

• VS Code
• PyCharm

Review changes via command line

To manually merge these changes, make sure you're on the main branch, then run:

git fetch origin sourcery/main
git merge --ff-only FETCH_HEAD
git reset HEAD^

Help us improve this pull request!

[sourcery-ai]

Lines 7-7 refactored with the following changes:

• Use f-string instead of string concatenation (use-fstring-for-concatenation)

[sourcery-ai]

Function get_stock_detail refactored with the following changes:

• Inline variable that is immediately returned (inline-immediately-returned-variable)

[sourcery-ai]

Function get_stock_with_query_params refactored with the following changes:

• Use set when checking membership of a collection of literals (collection-into-set)

[sourcery-ai]

Function HandleStock.get_analysis refactored with the following changes:

• Inline variable that is immediately returned (inline-immediately-returned-variable)

[sourcery-ai]

Sourcery Code Quality Report

✅  Merging this PR will increase code quality in the affected files by 0.02%.

Quality metrics	Before	After	Change
Complexity	0.31 ⭐	0.32 ⭐	0.01 👎
Method Length	33.31 ⭐	32.92 ⭐	-0.39 👍
Working memory	5.25 ⭐	5.24 ⭐	-0.01 👍
Quality	86.63% ⭐	86.65% ⭐	0.02% 👍

Other metrics	Before	After	Change
Lines	105	108	3

Changed files	Quality Before	Quality After	Quality Change
copilot/sample.py	72.38% 🙂	72.26% 🙂	-0.12% 👎
fastapi_regression/main.py	95.44% ⭐	95.39% ⭐	-0.05% 👎
fastapi_regression/stock.py	86.86% ⭐	87.38% ⭐	0.52% 👍

Here are some functions in these files that still need a tune-up:

File	Function	Complexity	Length	Working Memory	Quality	Recommendation

Legend and Explanation

The emojis denote the absolute quality of the code:

• ⭐ excellent
• 🙂 good
• 😞 poor
• ⛔ very poor

The 👍 and 👎 indicate whether the quality has improved or gotten worse with this pull request.

---

Please see our documentation here for details on how these metrics are calculated.

We are actively working on this report - lots more documentation and extra metrics to come!

Help us improve this quality report!