This is needed for the next commit.
This also requires dropping CI_RETRY from the docker build step, which
is fine, because CI_RETRY should be called inside the build script, not
outside.
Also, fix a doc typo.
b68e5a7fef lint: specify the right commit range when running locally (James O'Beirne)
dff7ed5732 test: add an easy way to run linters locally (James O'Beirne)
Pull request description:
Adds a Dockerfile configuration ~~(originally written mostly by fanquake)~~ that allows straightforward running of linters with compatible versions locally. This removes a ton of annoyance when trying to appease CI, because many of the linter versions are quite old and difficult to maintain locally.
I realize that people may not be thrilled to add more ancillary tooling to the repo, but I think this makes a lot of sense given the linter versions listed in this container configuration are dictated by this repo (within the CI configuration), so having these things live in two separate places is a recipe for version mismatches.
Eventually we can likely just use this container on CI directly to avoid any chance of inconsistencies between local dev experience and CI.
ACKs for top commit:
aureleoules:
ACK b68e5a7fef
stickies-v:
ACK b68e5a7fe
john-moffett:
ACK b68e5a7fef
Tree-SHA512: 7ef7a5dae023d81fdb6296d5d92dfa074ee321c7993e607c9f014d0f21c91558611aa00fc3ce1edc7b5e68371aea0d27fa1931291a79bb867a6c783bb536775f
Adds a Dockerfile configuration
that allows straightforward running of linters with compatible versions
locally. This removes a ton of annoyance when trying to appease CI,
because many of the linter versions are quite old and difficult to
maintain locally.
I realize that people may not be thrilled to more ancillary tooling to
the repo, but I think this makes a lot of sense given the linter
versions listed in this container configuration are dictated by this
repo (within the CI configuration), so having these things live in
two separate places is a recipe for version mismatches.
Eventually we can likely just use this container on CI directly to avoid
any chance of inconsistencies between local dev experience and CI.
123043e99c ci: Bump lint task image to Ubuntu Jammy (Hennadii Stepanov)
9b86114058 ci: Use pyenv's `python-build` to install Python in lint task (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
This PR:
- is an alternative to bitcoin/bitcoin#26581 and bitcoin/bitcoin#26637
- closesbitcoin/bitcoin#26548
Key advantages of this PR over others:
- it uses pyenv's `python-build` [standalone](https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv/tree/master/plugins/python-build#using-python-build-standalone)
- requires no additional computational resources
Note for testing. The lint task must success regardless of whether the `python_cache` is populated or invalidated.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 123043e99c
fanquake:
ACK 123043e99c
Tree-SHA512: ba0fcdd4f2939a59692b173dcd1f5704444cfcfbb8111538c6f8160056d0536bba250e4f9b0f8c66f8b454e52034bf36ffe6afae76cdc0f7cc5b58b576d790ba
Updates Python linters, spellchecking, and ShellCheck versions. The PR links are updated for
the dependency versions in test/README.md. ShellCheck SC2230 removed to align with with new
behaviour in v0.7.1.
Fixes#19346.
Support for type hints was introduced in Python 3.5. Type hints make it easier to read and review code in my opinion. Also an IDE may discover a potential bug sooner. Yet, as PEP 484 says: "It should also be emphasized that Python will remain a dynamically typed language, and the authors have no desire to ever make type hints mandatory, even by convention."
Mypy is used in lint-python.sh to do the type checking. The package is standard so there is little chance that it will be abandoned. Mypy checks that type hints in source code are correct when they are not, it fails with an error.
Useful resources:
* https://docs.python.org/3.5/library/typing.html
* https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/
Primarily I'd like to remove this because it is very imprecise, due to
Python's dynamic nature, giving it a large list of false positives that
need to be listed as exceptions. See for example #16906.
It's also a frequent source of complaints. I'm doubtful of the
usefulness of checking for dead code in a linter in the first place.
Having some dead code in the test framework for a while is not a
disaster.
MarcoFalke