On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Aaron Meurer <asmeu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Exactly. This is why I put that warning in there. I was thinking of
> pylint. There's supposed to be a way to customize pylint, so that you
> can disable the useless warnings. Otherwise, I would just stick to
> pyflakes.
>
> And note that sometimes the tests will still pass, e.g., when a
> variable is not defined because that particular code path is not
> covered by the tests. You can see what lines are covered by using the
> ./bin/coverage_report.py script (I think we also have some tasks for
> this too).
Ah, it seems we never did add tasks for this. Well, I am going to add
some now. I don't know if we can still add tasks until November 28 or
just modify them. If not, they will show up in the next round of tasks
in December.
Aaron Meurer
>
> Aaron Meurer
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Matt Habel <habel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Pylint is giving me a buttload of errors that don't really seem like
>> errors. The tests run and pass fine, so I really can't figure out what
>> pylint is complaining about. Maybe I set it up wrong?
>>
>> On Nov 21, 4:54 pm, Aaron Meurer <asmeu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The functions module is fine. I just tried it, and I think they can
>>> all be fixed. The only exception would be if pyflakes has made a
>>> mistake and things that something is wrong but really isn't (this can
>>> happen sometimes due to the dynamic nature of Python).
>>>
>>> I think it's actually pylint, not pyflakes, that I was thinking of
>>> regarding that comment. I will modify the task description to make
>>> this clear. Note that pylint gives way more output, but a lot of it
>>> is things like "Invalid name "z" (should match
>>> [a-z_][a-z0-9_]{2,30}$)", but short or long names like that are
>>> actually fine. You can use pylint or pyflakes to do this task (but if
>>> you choose pylint, ignore the invalid name and "too many..."
>>> warnings).
>>>
>>> Aaron Meurer
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Matt Habel <habel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Hi there mentors and others of this project, I am just following up on
>>> > my task claim from earlier today. As stated, I need to find a good
>>> > module to work on, would the functions module be okay?
>>>
>>> > Also, what kind of errors are skippable?
>>>
>>> > Thanks
>>>
>>> > --
>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> > "sympy" group.
>>> > To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com.
>>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> > sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> > For more options, visit this group
>>> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "sympy" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
>>
>>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy" group.
To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
