On Tue Nov 18 2014 at 1:25:07 PM Claudiu Popa <pcmantic...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Stefan Bucur <stefan.bu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I'm developing a Python static analysis tool that flags common > programming > > errors in Python programs. The tool is meant to complement other tools > like > > Pylint (which perform checks at lexical and AST level) by going deeper > with > > the code analysis and keeping track of the possible control flow paths in > > the program (path-sensitive analysis). > > > > > Hey, Stefan. > > That's great! It's really cool to see more people interested in static > analysis with Python. > Control flow analysis is missing in Pylint and due to this, we have a > couple of false positives. > For instance, the following code will emit a raising-bad-type warning, > even though exc is later > reassigned (but not deduced by the inference engine): > > exc = None > for i in range(10): > try: > 1 / 0 > break > except Exception as e: > exc = e > else: > raise exc > This is very interesting (and a good reminder of the existence of the for/else construct, which I should probably use more often :) ). It would actually be nice to have a suite of such snippets, to be able to benchmark analysis tools more uniformly. Stefan
_______________________________________________ code-quality mailing list code-quality@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/code-quality
