If we have:
@dataclasses.dataclass
class Result:
"""
Class for storing stuff.
Attributes
----------
foo
The foo.
bar
the bar.
"""
_: dataclasses.KW_ONLY
foo: int
bar: int
The linter complains that the _ placeholder needs documenting:
DOC601 Class `Result`: Class docstring contains fewer class attributes than actual class attributes. (Please read https://jsh9.github.io/pydoclint/checking_class_attributes.html on how to correctly document class attributes.)
DOC603 Class `Result`: Class docstring attributes are different from actual class attributes. (Or could be other formatting issues: https://jsh9.github.io/pydoclint/violation_codes.html#notes-on-doc103 ). Attributes in the class definition but not in the docstring: [_: dataclasses.KW_ONLY]. (Please read https://jsh9.github.io/pydoclint/checking_class_attributes.html on how to correctly document class attributes.)
I think perhaps this should be an exception (but no exception made for _baz).
Perhaps some pragma where we could write:
@dataclasses.dataclass
class Result:
"""
Class for storing stuff.
Attributes
----------
foo
The foo.
bar
the bar.
"""
_: dataclasses.KW_ONLY # doclint: ignore[no-docs]
foo: int
bar: int
Note that this pragma just says it doesn't need documenting, but does not say anything about type checking.
If we have:
The linter complains that the
_placeholder needs documenting:I think perhaps this should be an exception (but no exception made for
_baz).Perhaps some pragma where we could write:
Note that this pragma just says it doesn't need documenting, but does not say anything about type checking.