On Mar 25, 6:39 pm, "Edward K. Ream" <[email protected]> wrote: > BTW, doesn't pylint also complain about undefined g and p vars?
I would like to point that you are leo-centric here. I don't have any g and p (these are leo global variables, right?) in my project. I have a simple Python module and some tests for it. The module logic is not related to leo or its API at all. I'm just using leo as IDE for this, to become familiar with its testing framework. That's why I'm also using @test nodes. If I would generalize my recent leo experience, I think could restrict it to this question that appears: If I'm using leo as IDE for a Python project and I'm also using leo's testing framework, how hard would it be to alternate using leo and not using leo for coding. In practice, this workflow looks more realistic: - I'm writing code using leo - I'm writing tests using @test nodes - I might want to distribute the source code including tests - an user might want to run the tests, but he might need leo for this, unless there is a way to run them without having leo (that's why I've asked about this) - an user can find a bug and submit a patch - I would need to merge the patch manually into my leo project, because I distribute only python source code (the module itself and the tests) without including the leo outline --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
