You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The current behavior is misaligned with my interpretation of the documentation.
Description
With # gazelle:python_generation_mode file, if there is a folder with say existing_main.py and :existing_main of type py_binary, then if I add added_main.py, I'd expect a py_binary named :added_main to be generated.
Reading documentation, in particular If python_generation_mode is set to file, then instead of one py_binary target per module, Gazelle will create one py_binary target for each file with such a line, and the name of the target will match the name of the script., I think this aligns with my expectation.
π bug report
Affected Rule
Gazelle
Is this a regression?
The current behavior is misaligned with my interpretation of the documentation.
Description
With
# gazelle:python_generation_mode file
, if there is a folder with sayexisting_main.py
and:existing_main
of typepy_binary
, then if I addadded_main.py
, I'd expect apy_binary
named:added_main
to be generated.Reading documentation, in particular
If python_generation_mode is set to file, then instead of one py_binary target per module, Gazelle will create one py_binary target for each file with such a line, and the name of the target will match the name of the script.
, I think this aligns with my expectation.Unfortunately it seems like right now
:added_main
is not generated. Please see this unit test and corresponding output.π¬ Minimal Reproduction
π₯ Exception or Error
π Your Environment
Operating System:
Output of
bazel version
:Rules_python version:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: