Skip to content

Conversation

@mbyrnepr2
Copy link
Member

@mbyrnepr2 mbyrnepr2 commented Nov 7, 2025

Type of Changes

Type
βœ“ πŸ› Bug fix
✨ New feature
πŸ”¨ Refactoring
πŸ“œ Docs

Description

Fix a false positive for unbalanced-tuple-unpacking when a tuple is assigned to a function call and the structure of the function's return value is ambiguous.

Closes #10721

…is assigned to a function call and the structure of the function's return value is ambiguous.

Closes pylint-dev#10721
@mbyrnepr2 mbyrnepr2 changed the title Fix a false positive for unbalanced-tuple-unpacking when a tuple … Fix a false positive for unbalanced-tuple-unpacking. Nov 7, 2025
@github-actions

This comment has been minimized.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 7, 2025

Codecov Report

βœ… All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
⚠️ Please upload report for BASE (main@4f0716a). Learn more about missing BASE report.
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #10724   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   95.98%           
=======================================
  Files           ?      176           
  Lines           ?    19537           
  Branches        ?        0           
=======================================
  Hits            ?    18752           
  Misses          ?      785           
  Partials        ?        0           
Files with missing lines Coverage Ξ”
pylint/checkers/variables.py 97.28% <100.00%> (ΓΈ)
πŸš€ New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@Pierre-Sassoulas Pierre-Sassoulas added this to the 4.0.3 milestone Nov 7, 2025
@Pierre-Sassoulas Pierre-Sassoulas added False Positive 🦟 A message is emitted but nothing is wrong with the code backport maintenance/4.0.x labels Nov 7, 2025
Copy link
Member

@Pierre-Sassoulas Pierre-Sassoulas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, just curious about what is happening when it should raise and maybe comment that it's a known false negative. (because there's a constraint for None now in astroid, maybe we can do it?)

@github-actions

This comment has been minimized.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Nov 8, 2025

πŸ€– According to the primer, this change has no effect on the checked open source code. πŸ€–πŸŽ‰

This comment was generated for commit f4bf17a

@Pierre-Sassoulas Pierre-Sassoulas enabled auto-merge (squash) November 8, 2025 07:52
@Pierre-Sassoulas Pierre-Sassoulas merged commit 1496340 into pylint-dev:main Nov 8, 2025
44 checks passed
pylint-backport bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 8, 2025
* Fix a false positive for ``unbalanced-tuple-unpacking`` when a tuple is assigned to a function call and the structure of the function's return value is ambiguous.

Closes #10721

Co-authored-by: Pierre Sassoulas <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 1496340)
Pierre-Sassoulas added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 9, 2025
…ple-unpacking``. (#10726)

Fix a false positive for ``unbalanced-tuple-unpacking``. (#10724)

* Fix a false positive for ``unbalanced-tuple-unpacking`` when a tuple is assigned to a function call and the structure of the function's return value is ambiguous.

Closes #10721


(cherry picked from commit 1496340)

Co-authored-by: Mark Byrne <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Pierre Sassoulas <[email protected]>
@mbyrnepr2 mbyrnepr2 deleted the 10721_fp_unbalanced_tuple_unpacking branch November 11, 2025 12:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

backport maintenance/4.0.x False Positive 🦟 A message is emitted but nothing is wrong with the code

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

pylint tracks the wrong return type of an overloaded function

2 participants