Tim Peters wrote: > > >> doctest.py:528: Parameter (prefix) not used > >> docstring says prefix is used, but it isn't > > > Tim? > > No, the docstring says prefix is ignored: > > def is_private(prefix, base): > """prefix, base -> true iff name prefix + "." + base is "private". > > Prefix may be an empty string, and base does not contain a period. > Prefix is ignored (although functions you write conforming to this > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > protocol may make use of it). > ... Oops, sorry about that, I saw all the example usages in the docstring and thought it was used. I didn't pay close enough attention. > I wouldn't be averse to adding, e.g., > > if 0: > prefix # make prefix appear used to checking tools > > but sooner or later checking tools will complain about that too. I wouldn't worry about it. I think I will eventually create a suppressions dictionary for the std library. So any warning that checker might normally output will not produce a warning, when it has been determined the code is correct. The capability exists to do this today. However, my concern is putting in a suppression and later that suppression masks a real error. In general, we (collectively) can define best practices for both code and checking tools, at least pychecker. Neal
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4