In article <mailman.10467.1401411041.18130.python-l...@python.org>, Mark Lawrence <breamore...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 30/05/2014 01:13, Roy Smith wrote: > > We've recently started using pyflakes. The results seem to be similar > > to most tools of this genre. It found a few real problems. It > > generated a lot of noise about things which weren't really wrong, but > > were easy to fix (mostly, unused imports), and a few plain old false > > positives which have no easy "fix" (in the sense of, things I can change > > which will make pyflakes STFU). > > > > So, what's the best practice here? How do people deal with the false > > positives? Is there some way to annotate the source code to tell > > pyflakes to ignore something? > > > > I was under the impression that pyflakes was configurable. It it isn't > I'd simply find another tool. Having said that if you don't get better > answers here try gmane.comp.python.code-quality. I didn't know that list existed, it looks very interesting. Thanks for the pointer! -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
