Hi,
I was being told to share my plugin in the current state. It would be
helpful if someone take a look about it in my previous mail and provide
feedback.
Thanks.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Ahirnish Pareek <ahirn...@arista.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The idea of plugin is very simple and I felt the need of it in my
> organization's code base where we use python 2.7 to write the tests.
>
> There are a lot of functions which looks like this: def foo( var1,
> name1=value, *args ):
>
> The problem that I want to deal with is that we should not have keyword
> arguments( *name1* ) before positional arguments( **args* ). Although the
> function can still be called by passing *name1* as positional argument
> but there would be no way to not specify *name1* but specify **args*.
> def foo(a, b=3, *args):
> print a, b, args
>
> Case1: a = 0, b = 2, args = (4, 5)
> foo(0, 2, 4, 5) => 0 2 (4, 5)
>
> Case2: a = 0, b = <default_value>, args = (4, 5)
> foo(0, 4, 5) => 0 4 (5, ) ==> args list modified as well as value of 'b'
>
> And of course, we cant do this:
> foo(0, b=2, 4, 5)
>
> I plan to put this in design_analysis checker and the check looks like
> this:
>
> from astroid.test_utils import extract_node
> n = extract_node('''
> def test(a, b=2, *args, c=3, **kwargs):
> pass
> ''')
>
> *if n.args.defaults and n.args.varargs:*
> print <ErrMsg>
>
> I already checked it by loading this plugin as an external plugin in my
> pylintrc file and it worked as expected.
>
> Claudio suggested that this might be a useful check, so I plan to merge it
> in the developing code-base.
>
> Do let me know your thoughts!
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Ahirnish Pareek <ahirn...@arista.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have never patched anything to the open-source code and I am confused
>> as to what are the right steps to follow. I need to patch a function
>> argument related checker into the pylint code base. Can someone point me to
>> the steps need to follow to ensure my changes go upstream?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Claudiu Popa <pcmantic...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Ahirnish Pareek <ahirn...@arista.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> >
>>> > I was wondering if there's a pattern to calculate Pylint's message-id
>>> > numbers? I know that first alphabet indicates if its a warning, error,
>>> > convention, refactor or fatal but how do we come up with 4-digit number
>>> > after that?
>>> >
>>> > Like - E1605. E = Error but what is 1605?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> Base id of standard checkers (used in msg and report ids):
>>> 01: base
>>> 02: classes
>>> 03: format
>>> 04: import
>>> 05: misc
>>> 06: variables
>>> 07: exceptions
>>> 08: similar
>>> 09: design_analysis
>>> 10: newstyle
>>> 11: typecheck
>>> 12: logging
>>> 13: string_format
>>> 14: string_constant
>>> 15: stdlib
>>> 16: python3
>>>
>>> So for E1605, that would be from the python 3 checker. Since it's pretty
>>> hard to remember all this, the message ids will be deprecated at some
>>> point, in favor of using symbolic names.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Ahirnish
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ahirnish
>
--
Regards,
Ahirnish
_______________________________________________
code-quality mailing list
code-quality@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/code-quality
