Guido van Rossum wrote: > I believe that evertually some PyChecker-like technology will be > incorporated in the Python compiler. The same happened to C > compilers: the lint program became useless once GCC incorporated the > same technology. pychecker was (and still is) an experiment to me. But I think it would be great if the lessons from pychecker could be integrated into the compiler. Currently, I think there are 2 or 3 warnings which definitely fit this class: No global found, using ++/--, and expressions with no effect as Jason described. I have posted a patch on SF to demonstrate the feasibility of expressions with no effect: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=505826&group_id=5470&atid=305470 It should be pretty easy to warn about ++ and --. No global found would probably require another pass of the code after compilation. I'd be happy to help the process of integrating warnings into the compiler, however, I'm not sure how to proceed. Should pychecker be put into the standard library (users can now do: import pychecker.checker and all modules imported are checked by installing an __import__)? Should pychecker be added as a tool? Should a PEP be written? etc. > But these warnings will always have a different status than purely > syntactical error: there are often cases where the user knows better > (for example, sometimes an attribute reference can have a desirable > side effect). I agree. 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