On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Michael Foord <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > 2011/2/17 Arve Knudsen <[email protected]> > > 2011/2/17 Jürgen Hermann <[email protected]> >> >>> > It has to? Why? For religious reasons? >>> >>> No. It's because you can easily turn off what you see, but it's hard to >>> turn on what you don't see. >>> >> >> After programming a lot of C/C++, this is the first time I've heard anyone >> complain that gcc (or any other compiler) isn't super strict by default. How >> hard is it anyway to put -Wall in your CFLAGS?? >> >> I definitely think it's better to let people enable especially strict >> warnings if/when they see the need; besides, static checks aren't by any >> stretch perfect, they can merely indicate possible code improvements. >> Consider also that Python being a dynamic language makes it notoriously >> difficult to get a tool like pylint right, meaning that there will be a >> certain amount of false positives, which result in extra work for the >> programmer and uglier code (pylint directives in comments). It's better for >> pylint not to be overly ambitious, considering it's a means to an end, not >> an end in itself (to some of us anyway). >> >> > Right. The biggest reason I hear for not using pylint is how noisy it is by > default and how hard to configure it to be useful it is. > A voice of reason :) Arve
_______________________________________________ Python-Projects mailing list [email protected] http://lists.logilab.org/mailman/listinfo/python-projects
