Hi Julien,
On 2011-03-14 at 13:20 +, Caolán McNamara wrote:
> > I added this because of a warning (error) with pychecker. On the
> > contrary of the other blocks, the variable uri "wasn't" declared and
> > initialized whereas it was used in this block.
>
> Ah, i see it now, its a use of that
On Mon, 2011-03-14 at 12:56 +, serv serva wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I added this because of a warning (error) with pychecker. On the
> contrary of the other blocks, the variable uri "wasn't" declared and
> initialized whereas it was used in this block.
Ah, i see it now, its a use of that "uri" insi
t complain after this add.
Are there other ways to check that everything is ok so I'll use them next time ?
Julien.
--- En date de : Lun 14.3.11, Caolán McNamara a écrit :
> De: Caolán McNamara
> Objet: Re: [Libreoffice] Rewiew needed for pythonscript.py patch (new try)
> À: &q
On Sat, 2011-03-12 at 23:43 +0100, Julien Nabet wrote:
> And now, ladies and gentlemen, the patch ! :-)
Why the addition of a "uri = expandUri( name )" into replaceByName ?,
i.e. this hunk
@@ -962,8 +964,9 @@ class PythonScriptProvider( unohelper.Base,
XBrowseNode, XScriptProvider, XNameC
Le 12/03/2011 23:38, Christian Lohmaier a écrit :
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Julien Nabet wrote:
Here is a new try for fixing warning/error pychecker in the .py files of
libs-core/scripting/source/pyprov
Could anybody tell me if this is ok (and i can push it myself) or not ?
T
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Julien Nabet wrote:
>
> Here is a new try for fixing warning/error pychecker in the .py files of
> libs-core/scripting/source/pyprov
> Could anybody tell me if this is ok (and i can push it myself) or not ?
This time you forgot to attach the patch :-)
ciao
Chris
Hello,
Here is a new try for fixing warning/error pychecker in the .py files of
libs-core/scripting/source/pyprov
Could anybody tell me if this is ok (and i can push it myself) or not ?
This time I used this to check there is no tabs and spaces mixed.
python -tt ppythonscript.py
This one has on
