On 2018-03-08 23:57, Ben Finney wrote:
Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> writes:
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 10:33 AM, Ben Finney <ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> In many cases, those eyes can be virtual and non-human.
>
> That's what syntax highlighting, and tools even more impressive
> (e.g. linting tools that run continually), offer in a programmer's
> text editor: a pair of eyes looking for mistakes while you type.
Often true, but not always.
You mean the tool is not always looking for mistakes while you type?
If you mean that the tool doesn't catch all mistakes: of course not, and
I didn't imply it would. Are you saying that's a reason against using
such automated tools? (If not, I don't really understand what objection
you're making.)
Certainly it'd be good to always have a *perfect* overseer checking for
mistakes . Until that happy day, though, let's use the
tools available to improve our code before even attempting to run it.
"... while one types"? I'm not so sure.
In the past I've used an IDE (not for Python) that, for example,
underlined any identifiers that hadn't been defined, but found it
annoying because it was indicating errors that were due to my not having
finished writing yet!
Type, pause for thought, syntax error... yes, I know it's a syntax error
at the moment, but I'm not finished!
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
