Am 25.03.2020 um 00:20 hat John Snow geschrieben: > This doesn't fix everything in here, but it does help clean up the > pylint report considerably. > > This should be 100% style changes only; the intent is to make pylint > more useful by working on establishing a baseline for iotests that we > can gate against in the future. > > Signed-off-by: John Snow <js...@redhat.com> > Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> > Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mre...@redhat.com>
> @@ -550,8 +546,8 @@ def flatten_qmp_object(self, obj, output=None, > basestr=''): > if output is None: > output = dict() > if isinstance(obj, list): > - for i in range(len(obj)): > - self.flatten_qmp_object(obj[i], output, basestr + str(i) + > '.') > + for i, atom in enumerate(obj): > + self.flatten_qmp_object(atom, output, basestr + str(i) + '.') I think atom isn't strictly the right word because we expect nested data structures (as shown by the recursive call). If I understand correctly, what Python calls things in lists is "items". Kevin
