The flake8 comments should now line up correctly with your diff. I got more feedback that some of the comments were a little strict (and it's unclear which ones will be enforced) so I posted a diff to disable some of the checks:
https://gerrit.cloudera.org/#/c/11102/ On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 10:00 AM, Tim Armstrong <[email protected]> wrote: > Todd pointed out a bug where it was posting flake8 comments that didn't > align with the diff. I figured out the issue but will keep the job in a > silent mode for a bit while I monitor it. > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> This is from my .emacs. The way it works is that you select a region and >> then M-x pep8-region. >> >> (defun pep8-region (&optional b e) >> (interactive "r") >> (call-process-region b e >> "/home/jbapple/.local/bin/autopep8" t t nil >> "--indent-size=2" "--max-line-length=90" "-a" "-a" >> "-a" "-a" "-a" "-a" "-a" "-a" "--experimental" >> "-")) >> >> It's . . . not great. For instance, it doesn't understand that if you're >> already 4 spaces in at the start of the region, you don't want to revert >> back to 0 or 2 spaces in. That said, it can still be helpful. I don't >> think >> this is as sophisticated as clang-format.el. >> >> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 9:09 AM, Todd Lipcon <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 9:02 AM, Tim Armstrong < >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > I agree that it might be a little strict at the moment and disallow >> some >> > > reasonable formatting. The tool is controlled by the setup.cfg file in >> > the >> > > repo so it's easy enough to change the behaviour. >> > > >> > > I think we have been a little sloppy with Python style in general so I >> > > think some of these would be good to change over time. I think the >> main >> > > thing I'd like is to align the tool's behaviour with code reviews - if >> > > we're going to be strict about PEP 8 compliance in code reviews we >> should >> > > keep the tool strict. >> > > >> > > > 109 : E125 continuation line with same indent as next logical >> line >> > > I think this formatting is hard to read and confusing, I'm in favour >> of >> > > leaving this enabled. >> > > >> > > > 110 : E701 multiple statements on one line (colon) >> > > This if because of the one-line if statements we have in the code. I >> > don't >> > > feel strongly either way as long as we're consistent. >> > > >> > > > 129 : E231 missing whitespace after ',' >> > > > 185 : E251 unexpected spaces around keyword / parameter equals >> > > > 288 : E502 the backslash is redundant between brackets >> > > These seems like sloppy/inconsistent formatting to me, I'm in favour >> of >> > > keeping these enabled and fixing existing code as we go. >> > > >> > > > 368 : E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1 >> > > Our Python code is very inconsistent here, would be nice to make it >> more >> > > consistent. I'm in favour of keeping it enabled and fixing as we go. >> > > >> > > > 187 : E121 continuation line under-indented for hanging indent >> > > > 1295 : E128 continuation line under-indented for visual indent >> > > On one hand it would be nice to follow the PEP 8 style here ( >> > > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#indentation) but the other >> > > idioms >> > > seem fine to me. I've been asked on Python code reviews to switch to >> the >> > > PEP 8 indentation style before so I think we should align the tools >> > > behaviour with what we're going to ask for code reviews. >> > > >> > >> > >> > Alright, I agree with all of the above. One suggestion, though: is it >> > possible to get something like 'autopep8' to run in a 'patch formatting' >> > mode where it only reformats changed lines? Then we could more easily >> just >> > run a single command to ensure that our patches are properly formatted >> > before submitting to review. Or, at the very least, some instructions >> for >> > running the same flake8-against-only-my-changed-lines that gerrit is >> > running? >> > >> > -Todd >> > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 7:48 PM, Todd Lipcon >> <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > It seems like flake8 might need some adjustment of its policies. >> Here >> > are >> > > > the most common issues in the current test code: >> > > > >> > > > 109 : E125 continuation line with same indent as next logical >> line >> > > > 110 : E701 multiple statements on one line (colon) >> > > > 129 : E231 missing whitespace after ',' >> > > > 185 : E251 unexpected spaces around keyword / parameter equals >> > > > 187 : E121 continuation line under-indented for hanging indent >> > > > 288 : E502 the backslash is redundant between brackets >> > > > 368 : E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1 >> > > > 1295 : E128 continuation line under-indented for visual indent >> > > > >> > > > Maybe worth just disabling some of the indentation-related ones to >> > start? >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Tim Armstrong < >> > > > [email protected]> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > I have a few updates. >> > > > > >> > > > > I added an automatic build job for docs changes: >> > > > > https://jenkins.impala.io/job/gerrit-docs-auto-test/ >> > > > > >> > > > > I'm going to disable the "Build started" message for >> > > > > gerrit-code-review-checks. It seems a bit too chatty. Let me know >> if >> > > you >> > > > > disagree. >> > > > > >> > > > > I'm adding a job that automatically does some checks on the diff >> and >> > > > posts >> > > > > code review comments. I started off with Python flake8 comments. >> > > > > >> > > > > Let me know if you see any problems or if it turns out to be too >> > noisy. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:55 AM, Tim Armstrong < >> > > [email protected] >> > > > > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Hi All, >> > > > > > I'm enabling an automatic precommit job for code reviews >> uploaded >> > > to >> > > > > > gerrit that will run RAT, clang-tidy and a GCC debug >> compilation. >> > > This >> > > > is >> > > > > > to provide faster feedback on code reviews: >> > > https://issues.apache.org/ >> > > > > > jira/browse/IMPALA-7317 . I'll add some more checks but I'm >> wanting >> > > to >> > > > > > test the basic mechanism for a bit now. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > It excludes docs/ commits. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Let me know if you see any problems with it. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > Tim >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Todd Lipcon >> > > > Software Engineer, Cloudera >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Todd Lipcon >> > Software Engineer, Cloudera >> > >> > >
