On 04/26/2013 02:42 AM, Avnesh Shakya wrote:
hi,
I am trying to run my file using pychecker, but it's showing warning. I am
unable to get these warning. Please help me, how to remove these warning. I am
using pychecker first time.
avin@HP:~/github/UdacitySiteData$ pych
Read the warnings carefully. They are pretty clear.
On 26 Apr 2013 07:48, "Avnesh Shakya" wrote:
> hi,
>I am trying to run my file using pychecker, but it's showing warning. I
> am unable to get these warning. Please help me, how to remove these
> warning. I am
hi,
I am trying to run my file using pychecker, but it's showing warning. I am
unable to get these warning. Please help me, how to remove these warning. I am
using pychecker first time.
avin@HP:~/github/UdacitySiteData$ pychecker udacity_to_jsonFinal.py
Processing module udacity_to_json
Although PyChecker 0.8.18 is quite an improvement over previous
releases, it does have quirks. The PyChecker postprocessor might be
helpful, see
<http://code.activestate.com/recipes/546532/>
/Jean
On Jun 1, 4:48 am, Leo Breebaart wrote:
> When fed the following code:
>
On 6/1/2010 8:23 AM, Peter Otten wrote:
Leo Breebaart wrote:
When fed the following code:
def Foo():
class A(object):
def __init__(self):
pass
class B(object):
def __init__(self):
pass
PyChecker 0.8.18 warns:
foo.py:9: Redefining
On 6/1/2010 7:53 AM, Xavier Ho wrote:
> > Out of curiosity, why are you defining two classes inside a
> > function?
Not my code! Not my code! :-)
This code was contributed by someone else, and I merely took my
default action (in such cases) of running pyflakes, pychecker,
and
_(self):
pass
PyChecker 0.8.18 warns:
foo.py:9: Redefining attribute (__init__) original line (5)
Out of curiosity, why are you defining two classes inside a function?
-Xav
In terms of constructing a minimal example, Foo might be fodder for a closure
that either ret
Leo Breebaart wrote:
>
> When fed the following code:
>
> def Foo():
>
> class A(object):
> def __init__(self):
> pass
>
> class B(object):
> def __init__(self):
> pass
>
> PyChecker 0.8.18 wa
On 1 June 2010 21:48, Leo Breebaart wrote:
>
> When fed the following code:
>
> def Foo():
>
>class A(object):
>def __init__(self):
>pass
>
>class B(object):
>def __init__(self):
>pass
>
> PyCheck
When fed the following code:
def Foo():
class A(object):
def __init__(self):
pass
class B(object):
def __init__(self):
pass
PyChecker 0.8.18 warns:
foo.py:9: Redefining attribute (__init__) original line (5)
I do not understand what is
Am 04.02.10 01:52, schrieb Steve Holden:
Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
Am 03.02.10 22:46, schrieb soltys:
Hi Everybody,
I've been doing some test on pythons' virtualenv and recently I've
decided to run PyChecker. But I'm having some difficulties with importing
modules available o
Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
> Am 03.02.10 22:46, schrieb soltys:
>> Hi Everybody,
>> I've been doing some test on pythons' virtualenv and recently I've
>> decided to run PyChecker. But I'm having some difficulties with importing
>> modules availabl
al/__init__.py
-rw-r--r-- 1 139 2010-02-04 01:07 ./my/special/__init__.pyc
-rw-r--r-- 121 2010-02-04 01:06 ./my/special/module.py
-rw-r--r-- 1 159 2010-02-04 01:07 ./my/special/module.pyc
-rw-r--r-- 134 2010-02-04 01:07 ./tst.py
the program tst.py runs as expected:
> $ python tst.py
Am 03.02.10 22:46, schrieb soltys:
Hi Everybody,
I've been doing some test on pythons' virtualenv and recently I've
decided to run PyChecker. But I'm having some difficulties with importing
modules available only on virtualenv by pychecker. As if it was
trying to use sys
Hi Everybody,
I've been doing some test on pythons' virtualenv and recently I've
decided to run PyChecker. But I'm having some difficulties with importing
modules available only on virtualenv by pychecker. As if it was
trying to use systemwide python.
I've googled about
For my edification I was looking through the source code of
pychecker. I noticed that there was also a pychecker2 directory
(ubuntu). The pychecker command line tool points to pychecker (w/out
the 2). Does anyone know off the top of their head what this second
directory is about?
thanks
Zooko O'Whielacronx wrote:
I like pyflakes. I haven't tried the others. I made a setuptools
plugin named "setuptools_pyflakes". If you install that package, then
"python ./setup.py flakes" runs pyflakes on your package.
Regards,
Thanks Zooko
I decided to give all of them a try :-)
Esmai
I like pyflakes. I haven't tried the others. I made a setuptools
plugin named "setuptools_pyflakes". If you install that package,
then "python ./setup.py flakes" runs pyflakes on your package.
Regards,
Zooko
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
aven't seen any decent documentation on doing so.
>
> Actually, I don't know how, I'm just repeating what was claimed at a
> presentation on pylint. ;-) I've traditionally used pychecker myself
> and haven't seen any reason to switch.
I believe you just:
pylint
know how, I'm just repeating what was claimed at a
presentation on pylint. ;-) I've traditionally used pychecker myself
and haven't seen any reason to switch.
--
Aahz (a...@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/
"If you think it's expensive
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Ben Finney
> wrote:
> a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) writes:
>
> > Second, you can configure pylint to respect your personal style
>
> How? I haven't seen any decent documentation on doing so.
>
> --
> \ “When we call others dogmatic, what we really object
a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) writes:
> Second, you can configure pylint to respect your personal style
How? I haven't seen any decent documentation on doing so.
--
\ “When we call others dogmatic, what we really object to is |
`\ their holding dogmas that are different from our own
t heavy handled, a bit
> too much PEP 8, which was intended as a
> guide, rather than a prescription.
I've been very happy with pychecker. I found pylint a bit too fussy
(rather like the original C lint!)
Note that if you run pychecker from emacs (M-x compile, then
"pychecker m
In article , Colin J. Williams wrote:
>
>pylint seems a bit heavy handled, a bit too much PEP 8, which was
>intended as a guide, rather than a prescription.
That's half-true on both counts:
First of all, any new library must be PEP 8-compliant for submission to
the standard library, so PEP 8 is
Colin J. Williams wrote:
Esmail wrote:
What is the consensus of the Python community regarding these
code checkers?
In particular, are the stylistic recommendations that
pylint makes considered sensible/valid?
pylint seems a bit heavy handled, a bit too much PEP 8,
Just having used this fo
Esmail wrote:
What is the consensus of the Python community regarding these
code checkers?
In particular, are the stylistic recommendations that
pylint makes considered sensible/valid?
pylint seems a bit heavy handled, a bit
too much PEP 8, which was intended as a
guide, rather than a prescr
Esmail writes:
> In particular, are the stylistic recommendations that pylint makes
> considered sensible/valid?
You can configure pylint extensively, to follow *your* chosen style
recommendations. (Though I haven't found good documentation on how
that's done.)
> Are there any other tools you c
On Apr 21, 2009, at 9:11 PM, Esmail wrote:
What is the consensus of the Python community regarding these
code checkers?
You're assuming there is a consensus. =)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
What is the consensus of the Python community regarding these
code checkers?
In particular, are the stylistic recommendations that
pylint makes considered sensible/valid?
Are there any other tools you consider essential to Python
development?
Thanks.
Esmail
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/li
however.
On a related note, does anyone have a suggestion for a way to create a bunch
of similar properties (e.g., y1, y2, y5, etc.) in a "safe" way that either
pychecker or pylint can check (or at least not complain about)? Obviously I
would use better names than y1, y2, etc., but in the
Hi,
I wonder if pychecker projet is dead ? On pychecker home page
(http://pychecker.sourceforge.net/), last version date from February 3,
2006 and
their mailist contain spam messages only.
Other tools like pychecker is pylint at
(http://www.logilab.org/project/eid/857). This is a great tools
I'm new to pychecker. Some of my code generates the following
No class attribute (HWND) found
While HWND is not an attribute of the class, it IS an attribute of the
instance created (my class is one of several classes used to create
the new class). Can I use __pychecker__ to select
I execfile some script from another script like below
i = 5
execfile(script)
script uses i
Running script standalone as well as running script through pychecker is not
possible because script expects i
I still need to run script through pychecker.
I must do that from the calling script since
Edward> I am wondering whether anyone knows of a static source-code
Edward> analyzer for Python, kinda like a static pychecker.
Pychecker v2 was supposed to use source analysis instead of importing the
modules.
Skip
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 08:00:25 -0500, "Edward K. Ream" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am wondering whether anyone knows of a static source-code analyzer for
>Python, kinda like a static pychecker.
>
>That is, instead of being a run-time tool as pychecker is, it would be a
I am wondering whether anyone knows of a static source-code analyzer for
Python, kinda like a static pychecker.
That is, instead of being a run-time tool as pychecker is, it would be a
'compile-time' tool. If I were writing such a thing it would use the ast
returned from comp
On Fri, 09 Jun 2006 11:46:59 -0700, Matt Good wrote:
> Anthony Greene wrote:
>> Howdy, I had the impression that pychecker caught and reported such
>> dynamic syntactical errors.
>>
>> #!/usr/bin/env python
>>
>>
>> def add(i):
>> i += 10
&g
Rick> I think you're asking a lot from pychecker.
Rick> kop = 1
Rick> koi = 2
Rick> if True:
Rick> koo = 3
Rick> What would you like pychecker to report?
I thing the OP was hoping for a "not used" error, but it can only reasonably
Anthony Greene wrote:
> Howdy, I had the impression that pychecker caught and reported such
> dynamic syntactical errors.
>
> #!/usr/bin/env python
>
>
> def add(i):
> i += 10
>
> status = 3
>
> if 1 == 1:
> statuss = 15
>
> add(status)
>
Anthony Greene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Howdy, I had the impression that pychecker caught and reported such
> dynamic syntactical errors.
>
> #!/usr/bin/env python
>
>
> def add(i):
> i += 10
>
> status = 3
>
&
Howdy, I had the impression that pychecker caught and reported such
dynamic syntactical errors.
#!/usr/bin/env python
def add(i):
i += 10
status = 3
if 1 == 1:
statuss = 15
add(status)
===
exalted sysfault$ pychecker foo.py
Processing foo...
Warnings
A new version of PyChecker is available.
There are two notable new features (command line options):
--only and -#/--limit. --only will only print warnings from files
specified
on the command line. --limit will limit the number of warnings printed.
By default, only 10 warnings are
e one.
>> If you want copies instead, ASK for copies...:
>> gridSystemId = [ [None]*columns for x in xrange(rows) ]
> Interesting, could not pychecker recognize such situations in Python
> code and give warnings?
Well, it could always just issue warnings everytime it saw a list
mu
It may, but I haven't been using Pychecker yet. I'm still fairly new to
Python.
Thanks,
Chris M.
"Roman Suzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, Chris McCoy wrote:
>
>> Thank you! I've been bang
you observe is the only possible one.
>
> If you want copies instead, ASK for copies...:
>
> gridSystemId = [ [None]*columns for x in xrange(rows) ]
Interesting, could not pychecker recognize such situations in Python
code and give warnings?
Sincerely yours, Roman Suzi
--
[EM
* Codetag PEP:
** I would like to comment on the codetags PEP, which I give a 0+.
I think the end "<>" is bad; I would be in favor of a block system or
something that looks more like regular Python (e.g. "#
:FIXME(line_count=10, date='2005-08-09', ...) ").
** As to the comments that sa
Neal Norwitz wrote:
> Special thanks to Ken Pronovici. He did a lot of work for this
> release and helped ensure it occurred.
>
> Version 0.8.15 of PyChecker is available. It's been over a year since
> the last release. Wow, time really does fly. Since it's been so
Special thanks to Ken Pronovici. He did a lot of work for this
release and helped ensure it occurred.
Version 0.8.15 of PyChecker is available. It's been over a year since
the last release. Wow, time really does fly. Since it's been so long
I'm sure I screwed something up, trea
FWIIW,
We use PyChecker all the time with Python files using importing wx plus
wx.grid or wx.stc, etc. and the run times vary between 5 and 15
seconds.
This is Python 2.4 with wxPython 2.4.2.4 and RedHat Fedora Core 2 Linux
running on a 1.2 GHz Pentium 4 M laptop.
/Jean Brouwers
--
http
Does anyone know how to stop the command line pychecker from analyzing
particular modules? It really gets slowed down on some big ones.
In particular having 'import wx' takes a long while (30 - 60s). If you
try pycheck'ing the program below it takes a while and prints a z
Hi,
I'm trying to make a decent .pycheckrc for our project and have
stumbled on a few issues. (the pychecker-list would have seemed like
the appropriate place, but the S/N ratio seemed very low with all the
spam)
- for various reasons we decided to add an attribute to a module in the
s
its blender support with a
blender 3d object browser and its ability to run interactively
inside blender. Spe ships with wxGlade (gui designer), PyChecker
(source code doctor) and Kiki (regular expression console). Spe is
extensible with wxGlade.
This is a fix release for wxPython 2.5.4.1
If you
getting the subject of the note.
Coming back to this:
1- if a is None:
2- b = 1
3- else:
4- b = "Phew"
5- b = b + 1
pychecker should be able to warn you today (but it doesn't) that you are
using b to refer to objects of two different types. It's not typ
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 16:27:48 -0600, John Roth wrote:
>
> "Sylvain Thenault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 05:18:12 +0100, Philippe Fremy wrote:
>>
>> Did you take a look at the starkiller [1] and pypy projects [2] ?
>
> Has anything happened
Skip Montanaro wrote:
Francis> "Every well-formed expression of the language can be assigned a
Francis> type that can be deduced from the constituents of the
Francis> expression alone." Bird and Wadler, Introduction to Functional
Francis> Programming, 1988
Francis> This is certa
To complete Philippe's answer :
As Bird and Wadler continue :
"The major consequence of the discipline imposed by strong-typing is that any
expression which cannot be assigned a "sensible" type is regarded as not
being well-formed and is rejected by the computer before evaluation. Such
express
Skip Montanaro wrote:
Francis> "Every well-formed expression of the language can be assigned a
Francis> type that can be deduced from the constituents of the
Francis> expression alone." Bird and Wadler, Introduction to Functional
Francis> Programming, 1988
Francis> This is certa
Le mercredi 2 Février 2005 00:28, Philippe Fremy a écrit :
> I really hope that pypy will provide that kind of choice. Give me python
> with eiffel like contracts, super speed optimisation thank to type
> inference and I will be super happy.
That's also my dream. Type inference not so much for spe
Philippe Fremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Any other idea of a fun python improvement project I could join without
> too much hassle ? I can't help but thinking that pychecker ought to be
> able to do a better job.
Have a look at pypy -- around the key idea of reimplementing
"Steven Bethard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> So I assume the language spec is basically the grammar and the
> Language Reference docs[1]?
Yes. The de facto governing syntax specification is the grammar file in
the source code from which the parser is generate
Terry Reedy wrote:
> Nothing about bytecode is part of the language spec. And CPython
> bytecode is version specific. If the CPython implementation changed
> from a virtual stack machine to a virtual register machine, as was
> once discussed, the stack-oriented byte code would be replaced by a
>
"Steven Bethard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I don't know much about what pychecker does, but if it works with the
> bytecode, shouldn't it be fine for jython and IronPython? I thought the
> bytecode was part of the
Francis> "Every well-formed expression of the language can be assigned a
Francis> type that can be deduced from the constituents of the
Francis> expression alone." Bird and Wadler, Introduction to Functional
Francis> Programming, 1988
Francis> This is certainly not the case fo
with eiffel like contracts, super speed optimisation thank to type
inference and I will be super happy.
Thank everyone for its feedback.
Any other idea of a fun python improvement project I could join without
too much hassle ? I can't help but thinking that pychecker ought to be
able to do a
"Sylvain Thenault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 05:18:12 +0100, Philippe Fremy wrote:
Did you take a look at the starkiller [1] and pypy projects [2] ?
Has anything happened to Starkiller since PyCon 2004? The
latest mention I can find on Google i
huy wrote:
> do not yet have good coverage. TDD is a quite hard to practice as a
> beginner.
It's even harder to bolt onto an existing codebase :(
Tim Delaney
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
ote:
> > Hi,
>
> Hi
>
> > I would like to develop a tool that goes one step further than pychecker
> > to ensure python program validity. The idea would be to get close to what
> > people get on ocaml: a static verification of all types of the program,
> > with
Hi,
I do not want to discourage Philippe Fremy but I think that this would be very
very difficult to do without modifying Python itself.
What FP languages rely upon to achieve type inference is a feature named
"strong typing". A clear definition of strong typing is :
"Every well-formed express
it is very difficult to run into exception handler, some of
those are added defensely. Unfortunately those untested exception
sometimes fails precisely when we need it for diagnosis information.
pychecker sometime give false alarm. The argument of a string
interpolation may be a valid tuple. I
> But it can be useful to restrict type variety in certain situations
> e.g. prime number calculation :) And it would probably also be useful
> to check violations of restrictions before running the program in
> normal mode.
But that's what (oca)ml and the like do - they exactly don't force you to
: a is restricted to some_type
a := yet_another_type_value # OK, another fixed type is set
del a # release type restriction; a can be recreated in normal
# dynamic mode
The type fixing assignment could be used for optimization and for
checking the pr
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 05:18:12 +0100, Philippe Fremy wrote:
> Hi,
Hi
> I would like to develop a tool that goes one step further than pychecker
> to ensure python program validity. The idea would be to get close to what
> people get on ocaml: a static verification of all types of
Paul Rubin <http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Philippe Fremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I would like to develop a tool that goes one step further than
> > pychecker to ensure python program validity. The idea would be to get
> > close to what people get o
Paul Rubin wrote:
Philippe Fremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I would like to develop a tool that goes one step further than
pychecker to ensure python program validity. The idea would be to get
close to what people get on ocaml: a static verification of all types
of the program, without an
Philippe Fremy wrote:
I would like to develop a tool that goes one step further than pychecker
to ensure python program validity. The idea would be to get close to
what people get on ocaml: a static verification of all types of the
program, without any kind of variable declaration. This would
Philippe Fremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would like to develop a tool that goes one step further than
> pychecker to ensure python program validity. The idea would be to get
> close to what people get on ocaml: a static verification of all types
> of the program, without an
Hi,
I would like to develop a tool that goes one step further than pychecker
to ensure python program validity. The idea would be to get close to
what people get on ocaml: a static verification of all types of the
program, without any kind of variable declaration. This would definitely
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ben Sizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>But you could use a dict of return values, or even just assigning a
>different return value in each if clause. The end result is that you
>have a single well-defined exit point from the function, which is
>generally considered to
Peter Otten wrote:
The Set class has implementations for __cmp__() and __hash__() that
unconditionally raise an exception. pychecker assumes that these methods
are "abstract", i. e. meant to be overriden by a subclass, and warns that
you are instantiating an abstract base class,
"Ben Sizer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
But you could use a dict of return values, or even just assigning a
different return value in each if clause. The end result is that you
have a single well-defined exit point from the function, which is
generally considered to
But you could use a dict of return values, or even just assigning a
different return value in each if clause. The end result is that you
have a single well-defined exit point from the function, which is
generally considered to be preferable.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
I don't know pychecker, maybe there's something wrong with it as your
code seems valid to me.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Istvan Albert wrote:
> if I have this code:
>
> import sets
>
> class Foo:
> x = sets.Set()
>
> then pychecker says:
>
> test.py:4: Methods (__cmp__, __hash__) in sets.Set need to be overridden
> in a subclass
>
> I don't get this message. Wha
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<__main__.Foo instance at 0x00C578A0> Set([])
on 2.4. on WinXP. What environment do you run in?
I'm running it on cygwin,
but still don't get it, why the warning?
Istvan.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
mport sets
class Foo:
def __init__(self):
self.x = sets.Set()
x = Foo()
print x, getattr(x, 'x')
gives for me:
<__main__.Foo instance at 0x00C578A0> Set([])
on 2.4. on WinXP. What environment do you run in?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Hello all,
if I have this code:
import sets
class Foo:
x = sets.Set()
then pychecker says:
test.py:4: Methods (__cmp__, __hash__) in sets.Set need to be overridden in a
subclass
I don't get this message. What is it trying to say, and why?
Istvan.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/lis
return ...
if ...
return ...
often is exactly the right definition for a specific function.
I, incidentally, prefer this form over the
if ...
return ...
elif ...
return ...
the original poster described.
So: yes, "[g]enerally you use a dict of functions" when PyChecker
thinks
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:54:54 +, Frans Englich wrote:
> Hello,
Hi
> I take PyChecker partly as an recommender of good coding practice
You may alos be interested by Pylint [1].
Pylint is less advanced in bug detection than pychecker, but imho its good
coding practice detection i
Frans Englich wrote:
Hello,
I take PyChecker partly as an recommender of good coding practice, but I
cannot make sense of some of the messages. For example:
runner.py:878: Function (main) has too many lines (201)
What does this mean? Cannot functions be large? Or is it simply an advice that
> runner.py:878: Function (main) has too many lines (201)
>
> What does this mean? Cannot functions be large? Or is it simply an advice that
> functions should be small and simple?
It is advice.
> runner.py:200: Function (detectMimeType) has too many returns (11)
>
> The function is simply a long
Frans Englich wrote:
Also, another newbie question: How does one make a string stretch over several
lines in the source code? Is this the proper way?
(1)
print "asda asda asda asda asda asda " \
"asda asda asda asda asda asda " \
"asda asda asda asda asda asda"
A couple of other op
Hello,
I take PyChecker partly as an recommender of good coding practice, but I
cannot make sense of some of the messages. For example:
runner.py:878: Function (main) has too many lines (201)
What does this mean? Cannot functions be large? Or is it simply an advice that
functions should be
92 matches
Mail list logo
