Bug 211 <https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/issues/211>caused a crash when trying to save an unnamed .leo file. This bug was the result of a missing argument to g.app.gui.runSaveFileDialog.
It's surprising, but hardly shocking, that pylint never caught this bug, because there are three different methods called runSaveFileDialog in Leo. Otoh, these methods are supposed to be "the same" in some sense. Furthermore, the offending call matched none of the signatures of these three methods. I expect great things from Python's static type checking projects (see mypy <http://mypy-lang.org/> and peps 283 <https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0483/> and 284 <https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/>. Otoh, I understand neither the theory nor the code, nor the expected results from the theory in pep 283 <https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0483/>. Maybe mypy would handle similar code. Maybe not. In short, Python will benefit from a solid type checker, but one suspects there will always be problems that the type checker will not find. I'm still wondering whether other kinds of program analysis would complement static type checking, possibly using designer-supplied data that is not exactly type-related. Edward <https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0483/> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
