fix: issue D401 only for non-test/property functions and methods

[scop]

Extend test fixture to verify the targeting.

Includes two "attribute docstrings" which per PEP 257 are not recognized by the Python bytecode compiler or available as runtime object attributes. They are not available for us either at time of writing, but include them for completeness anyway in case they one day are.

Rust newbie here, review with a fine comb greatly appreciated :)

[charliermarsh]

Great! Let me know if any of the below is unclear.

[charliermarsh]

We have a little helper for this --- cast::name from src/ast/cast.rs. We know these are functions, even though it's not encoded in the type system. (Not great, but we should definitely error anyway if we get a non-FunctionDef here.)

[scop]

Made use of that and cast::decorator_list in 05ec78c.

[charliermarsh]

It looks like Pydocstyle defaults to accepting property,cached_property,functools.cached_property.

Maybe just for consistency with this "kind" of check, let's add a method to src/visibilty.rs like:

pub fn is_property(checker: &Checker, decorator_list: &[Expr]) -> bool {
    decorator_list.iter().any(|expr| {
        checker.resolve_call_path(expr).map_or(false, |call_path| {
            call_path.as_slice() == ["", "property"] || call_path.as_slice() == ["functools", "cached_property"]
        })
    })
}

That will check the additional decorator and ensure that it only triggers when functools is imported and track aliases and track overrides :)

[scop]

I actually implemented is_property in visibility.rs in my first cut of this patch, but then decided to move it back, "inlined" at the call site. I felt @property isn't actually related to visibility in the broad sense the other similar helpers there are, and thus it seemed misplaced.

But no strong opinions really, could you confirm if you'd still rather see it there and I'll refactor.

In any case, will revise this tomorrow. Thanks!

[charliermarsh]

Yeah I think that's a totally reasonable instinct, but I'd still rather see it in there. There are some other helpers in that file that aren't really related to visibility (like is_override), and I'd like to have them logically grouped for now.

[scop]

Sure, done in f38b51a.

[charliermarsh]

Looks great! Will merge when CI is green.

[charliermarsh]

Thanks tons.

[akx]

@scop Thanks for refining this! ❤️