On Thursday 18 March 2010 08:19:13 Sylvain Thénault wrote: > > > It seems like pylint have different goals with different focus and > > > emphasis. > > > > > > The man page says: > > > pylint - python code static checker > > this is "pylint -e", and should probably be fixed/enhanced to match the > reality. > > > > pylint --help says: > > > Check that a module satisfy a coding standard (and more !). > > this should be also fixed to match bare "pylint". > > [snip] > > Mads, are you ok that pylint -e does what you expect?
I think, a lot of warning should also be considered as static code checking; but some are imho more refactoring or less obvious or critical. For me there are at least four kinds of warnings : 1/ almost errors :W0102: *Dangerous default value %s as argument* :W0150: *%s statement in finally block may swallow exception* :W0221: *Arguments number differs from %s method* :W0222: *Signature differs from %s method* etc. 2/ things that can be fixed quickly :W0101: *Unreachable code* :W0104: *Statement seems to have no effect* :W0107: *Unnecessary pass statement* etc. 3/ warnings that could be considered as refactoring or conventions :W0105: *String statement has no effect* * a lot of __init__ warnings that seem often not very convincing to me :W0621: *Redefining name %r from outer scope (line %s)* :W0622: *Redefining built-in %r* :W0702: *No exception type(s) specified* :W0704: *Except doesn't do anything* etc 4/ W0511 : Used when a warning note as FIXME or XXX is detected. there was this proposal from Maarten ter Huurne (right?) to create a knew message category for that 5/ ?? I think, 1 and 2 should be included in quick test, the others not. -- Emile Anclin <emile.anc...@logilab.fr> http://www.logilab.fr/ http://www.logilab.org/ Informatique scientifique & et gestion de connaissances _______________________________________________ Python-Projects mailing list Python-Projects@lists.logilab.org http://lists.logilab.org/mailman/listinfo/python-projects
