Slightly refactor process_error_codes #20618
Merged
+11
−9
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
According to mypy_primer, this change doesn't affect type check results on a corpus of open source code. ✅ |
JukkaL
approved these changes
Jan 21, 2026
Collaborator
JukkaL
left a comment
JukkaL
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a bit clearer now, thanks!
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
process_error_codes was confusing to read due to the lack of distinction it made between error codes (ErrorCode) and error code names (str). This refactor fixes this, and also makes the documentation comment at the topic of the function a real comment.
The current CI ensures this does not introduce errors.