Skip to content

Conversation

haakonvt
Copy link
Contributor

@haakonvt haakonvt commented Sep 5, 2025

Note: We don't merge before v8 is in

Description

This is nice to have because we can avoid the very tedious horizontal scrolling in the SDK docs.

@haakonvt haakonvt requested review from a team as code owners September 5, 2025 13:51
Copy link
Contributor

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

Comment on lines +21 to +24
[tool.ruff.format]
# format code examples in docstrings to avoid users scrolling horizontally
docstring-code-format = true
docstring-code-line-length = 85
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is the PR, the rest is auto-fmt-work

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I did not find a way to put these settings into the pre-commit file 😢

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Doesn't ruff already parse the pyproject.toml file already? I tried to check out the first commit in the PR and run pre-commit --files SOME_PYTHON_FILE.PY, and it did format the docstrings. If I do the same on the master branch, the docstrings are untouched.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If I checkout f1c44291 and then run pre-commit run --all, I end up with the same state as b57a65f1 ✔️

Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 5, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 90.79%. Comparing base (ba384ad) to head (b57a65f).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2318      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.80%   90.79%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         168      168              
  Lines       25014    25014              
==========================================
- Hits        22714    22711       -3     
- Misses       2300     2303       +3     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
cognite/client/_api/agents/agents.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
cognite/client/_api/ai/tools/documents.py 78.57% <ø> (ø)
cognite/client/_api/annotations.py 95.65% <ø> (ø)
cognite/client/_api/assets.py 97.70% <ø> (ø)
cognite/client/_api/data_modeling/containers.py 96.00% <ø> (ø)
cognite/client/_api/data_modeling/data_models.py 97.91% <ø> (ø)
cognite/client/_api/data_modeling/graphql.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
cognite/client/_api/data_modeling/instances.py 88.34% <ø> (-0.24%) ⬇️
cognite/client/_api/data_modeling/spaces.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
cognite/client/_api/data_modeling/statistics.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
... and 46 more

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@erlendvollset
Copy link
Collaborator

Looks good, but I suggest waiting with this until we've merged #2311 and #2273 to avoid gnarly conflicts

Copy link
Contributor

@audunska audunska left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Very nice!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants