Update supported_api_gen.py: remove an invalid escape sequence "\_" using a raw string #52107
+1
−1
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
…sing a raw string
|
Mind filling up the PR description please? |
|
Ok |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Re-opening per the instructions in #50243 (comment)
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Remove an invalid escape sequence "_" using a raw string instead.
Why are the changes needed?
There is an invalid escape sequence in the code, which is silenced using a noqa comment. Recent python versions warn when parsing such a string, noqa comment or no. (I believe I may have seen this warning when mypy, a python typechecker, visited the code, or something like that.) Using a raw string removes the warning without changing the value of the string in this case. This change also allows us to remove a noqa comment.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No, except a python warning is silenced.
How was this patch tested?
Manual inspection.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.