You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 26, 2024. It is now read-only.
Hm, interesting. This is more or less intended behavior -- we are in fact not moving the definition but just fixing up references that happen to be in the same file -- but the question of what to do to the file with the definition when --no-automove is specified is a thorny one and I'm open to changing the behavior. What would you expect to get here? Should we specifically avoid fixing up references in the moved file if --no-automove is passed?
I expect the function definition and references don't changing if --no-automove is passed.
just tell me what should i do, such as
1.deffunc(*args, **kwargs): # --> def new_func(*args, **kwargs):2.print('this is a func \'{}\''.format(func)) # --> print('this is a func \'{}\''.format(new_func))
The most importance that show me the references place should i care
thx a lot
Ah, ok! That's not what it does at all -- what you're proposing is a --dry-run flag, I guess, which we could add! I'll update the issue title to match.
benjaminjkraft
changed the title
[BUG] with --no-automove argument, slicker also change my file
Support a --dry-run flag, to say what we would do but not do it
Apr 16, 2018
python: 2.7.13
slicker: 0.9.3
os: macOS 10.12.5
code snippet:
detail:
the function definition has no change. but the function print has been changed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: