Feature Request: Option to ignore nested functions

[torfsen]

Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST?:

• bug
• feature

Description of Bug or Feature

Nested functions (i.e. function definitions within function definitions) are usually small helpers that need no docstring and are not part of the public API. It should therefore be possible to optionally ignore them.

[econchick]

Thanks for the request! Would the -r/--ignore-regex help in this case? For instance:

# sample.py
"""Sample module-level docs"""

def top_level_func():
    """A top level function"""

    def inner_func():
        pass

$ interrogate -r inner_func tests/functional/sample/full.py -vv

=== Coverage for /Users/lynn/dev/interrogate/tests/functional/sample/ ====
--------------------------- Detailed Coverage ----------------------------
| Name                                      |                     Status |
|-------------------------------------------|----------------------------|
| full.py (module)                          |                    COVERED |
|   top_level_func (L5)                     |                    COVERED |
|-------------------------------------------|----------------------------|

-------------------------------- Summary ---------------------------------
| Name           |       Total |       Miss |       Cover |       Cover% |
|----------------|-------------|------------|-------------|--------------|
| full.py        |           2 |          0 |           2 |         100% |
|----------------|-------------|------------|-------------|--------------|
| TOTAL          |           2 |          0 |           2 |       100.0% |
------------ RESULT: PASSED (minimum: 80.0%, actual: 100.0%) -------------

[torfsen]

Would the -r/--ignore-regex help in this case?

In theory, yes -- but that would require me to hardcode all of the inner functions, since they usually don't follow any systematic naming scheme. That's something I'd like to avoid when working on a larger code base. Ignoring the nested functions completely (just like, say, magic functions) would be much easier.

It's not something that's a deal breaker for me, but it would be a welcome addition.

[econchick]

Ah, understood - I'll see if I can figure something out. Thanks for the idea!

[econchick]

Hey @torfsen - I've added this feature for ya in #24 via a new flag: -n / --ignore-nested-functions. It will be released in v1.2.0, but I want to try and address your other feature request before actually making that release. Feel free to try it out before then via

pip install git+https://github.com/econchick/interrogate.git@cd06c57b91cf8adf6fe692d310cdb1cb4afb1640

I'll update this issue once it is released on PyPI either way.

[econchick]

I've released 1.2.0 with this feature included - thank you for the suggestion!