Raise TypeError when a string is passed for port to URL.build()

[commonism]

What do these changes do?

Using port="" resulted in malformed urls, now using string for port raises TypeError

Are there changes in behavior for the user?

URL.build does not accept strings as port any longer.
URL.build does not create invalid urls when using "" as value for port.

Related issue number

fix #883

Checklist

• I think the code is well written
• Unit tests for the changes exist
• Documentation reflects the changes
• Add a new news fragment into the CHANGES folder
  • name it <issue_id>.<type> (e.g. 588.bugfix)
  • if you don't have an issue_id change it to the pr id after creating the PR
  • ensure type is one of the following:
    • .feature: Signifying a new feature.
    • .bugfix: Signifying a bug fix.
    • .doc: Signifying a documentation improvement.
    • .removal: Signifying a deprecation or removal of public API.
    • .misc: A ticket has been closed, but it is not of interest to users.
  • Make sure to use full sentences with correct case and punctuation, for example: Fix issue with non-ascii contents in doctest text files.

[commonism]

I did not include this in the PR - but the requirements file has a typo.

diff --git a/requirements/dev.txt b/requirements/dev.txt
index 62fe39a..3b676e4 100644
--- a/requirements/dev.txt
+++ b/requirements/dev.txt
@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
--r text.txt
+-r test.txt
 towncrier==23.11.0

[webknjaz]

I did not include this in the PR - but the requirements file has a typo.

diff --git a/requirements/dev.txt b/requirements/dev.txt
index 62fe39a..3b676e4 100644
--- a/requirements/dev.txt
+++ b/requirements/dev.txt
@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
--r text.txt
+-r test.txt
 towncrier==23.11.0

Fixed that in 85b53c9. Thanks!

[webknjaz]

Actually… I'm not sure if it's a good idea to accept empty strings at all. Should we error out instead, and aim for stricter public API input validation in general?

cc @Dreamsorcerer @mjpieters

[Dreamsorcerer]

Actually… I'm not sure if it's a good idea to accept empty strings at all. Should we error out instead, and aim for stricter public API input validation in general?

Yeah, it's typed as int. I'm not sure we should add code that explicitly supports something the type checker rejects (and supporting str in general would be odd).

yarl/yarl/__init__.pyi

Line 61 in 85b53c9

port: Optional[int] = ...,

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (8d28329) 99.74% compared to head (40b9ddb) 99.33%.
Report is 55 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #959      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   99.74%   99.33%   -0.41%     
==========================================
  Files           4       17      +13     
  Lines         772     3317    +2545     
  Branches      219      325     +106     
==========================================
+ Hits          770     3295    +2525     
- Misses          2       22      +20     

Flag	Coverage Δ
CI-GHA	99.24% <100.00%> (?)
OS-Linux	99.24% <100.00%> (?)
OS-Windows	99.57% <100.00%> (?)
OS-macOS	99.00% <100.00%> (?)
Py-3.10.11	99.48% <100.00%> (?)
Py-3.10.13	99.12% <100.00%> (?)
Py-3.11.6	99.12% <100.00%> (?)
Py-3.12.0	99.12% <100.00%> (?)
Py-3.7.17	99.04% <100.00%> (?)
Py-3.7.9	99.46% <100.00%> (?)
Py-3.8.10	99.41% <100.00%> (?)
Py-3.8.18	99.06% <100.00%> (?)
Py-3.9.13	99.41% <100.00%> (?)
Py-3.9.18	99.06% <100.00%> (?)
Py-pypy7.3.11	99.38% <100.00%> (?)
Py-pypy7.3.13	99.38% <100.00%> (?)
VM-macos	99.00% <100.00%> (?)
VM-ubuntu	99.24% <100.00%> (?)
VM-windows	99.57% <100.00%> (?)
unit	?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[webknjaz]

@commonism looks like the PR title and description no longer correspond to its contents. This needs to be corrected.