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.