[docs] Update common_issues.rst: update information about reveal type & locals #19059
+13
−5
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
…veal locals Previously it was impossible to have these in at run time (more or less), but now you can just import them.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Previously it was impossible to have these in at run time (more or less), but now you can just import them.
Tangential open question I'm curious about: Is there any interest in getting reveal_locals into typing? I've never used it myself, so I have no strong opinions one way or the other, but I'm surprised reveal_type made it in and reveal_locals didn't! I tried to find the history of this decision but gave up.