TST: Added script to enforce usage of match argument for tm.assert_produces_warning

[chaarvii]

• closes TST: Disallow bare tm.assert_produces_warning #58290
• All code checks passed.
• Added type annotations to new arguments/methods/functions.

Added a script called enforce_match_arg_in_assert_produces_warning.py which checks that all usages of tm.assert_produces_warning make use of the match argument. This is done to ensure that users are always displayed the correct warning message. Uses of tm.assert_produces_warning(None) have been excluded as no warning is produced in this case.

Furthermore, to ensure that the existing code doesn't fail the pre-commit stage, all files that currently do not use the match argument have been excluded.

Once the PR is merged in, we can open up another issue to shorten the list of "excluded" files.

[Aloqeely]

Thanks for the PR!

[chaarvii]

@Aloqeely Just fixed the issue with Sequence import. It works now with TYPE_CHECKING. Is there anything else left to be addressed? If not, is it good to merge?

[Aloqeely]

LGTM. cc @mroeschke

[chaarvii]

@mroeschke - are we going ahead with this PR? Any reason we’d like to hold it off for now? cc @Aloqeely

[github-actions]

This pull request is stale because it has been open for thirty days with no activity. Please update and respond to this comment if you're still interested in working on this.

[datapythonista]

Thanks for the contribution, and sorry this was not reviewed before. Maybe silly question, but since assert_produces_warning is our own function, why would we want to have a script to check if it's being called with the match parameter, when we can simply make the parameter required?

I'm ok with adding match (not sure if there are cases where it doesn't make sense). But this seems an overkill.

Maybe worth start by fixing some of the cases in somehow small PRs, and if that looks good, then just raise if match is not called (assuming there is agreement).

What do you think?

[github-actions]

This pull request is stale because it has been open for thirty days with no activity. Please update and respond to this comment if you're still interested in working on this.

[simonjayhawkins]

@chaarvii Thanks for the PR.

Closing to clear queue. we can reopen if you're still interested in working on this.