On 30/05/2014 02:14, Roy Smith wrote:
In article <mailman.10467.1401411041.18130.python-l...@python.org>,
Mark Lawrence <breamore...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 30/05/2014 01:13, Roy Smith wrote:
We've recently started using pyflakes. The results seem to be similar
to most tools of this genre. It found a few real problems. It
generated a lot of noise about things which weren't really wrong, but
were easy to fix (mostly, unused imports), and a few plain old false
positives which have no easy "fix" (in the sense of, things I can change
which will make pyflakes STFU).
So, what's the best practice here? How do people deal with the false
positives? Is there some way to annotate the source code to tell
pyflakes to ignore something?
I was under the impression that pyflakes was configurable. It it isn't
I'd simply find another tool. Having said that if you don't get better
answers here try gmane.comp.python.code-quality.
I didn't know that list existed, it looks very interesting. Thanks for
FYI the full list of Python lists on gmane here
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection