On Feb 15, 9:59 am, "Edward K. Ream" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Pass 5: dynamic analysis > > This is the fun/hard part. We want to infer the types that variables > can have, and the types that functions (and classes with __call__ > members) can have. Analyzing assignment statements is the big one. We can think of this phase as the heart of a globally optimizing compiler. That is, this phase will have information about all files in the files list readily available. For example, I would want to analyze all of Leo's core files at once. After I wrote the design, I started wondering whether some of the ideas of the pypy project might apply. Indeed, the pypy compiler has more detailed type information available to it than can any static checker such as pylint. I won't rule that out, but I'm not sure it's needed. I would settle for a pylint that could catch all obvious blunders in function calls. Apparently the present pylint doesn't do that. Edward -- 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.
