Mailman 3 February 2014 - code-quality

Bad coding style?
by Thomas Heller Feb. 8, 2014

Feb. 8, 2014

I sometimes have code like this: class Foo: def spam(self): .... from somewhere import method from somewhere import CONSTANT def blah(self): .... where CONSTANT defines a class attribute, anbd method is a method that I would like to call like any other methor (self.spam(), or self.blah()). This works nicely and is a compact coding style, however frosted complains about unused imports. Should I fix my coding habits, or should frosted by fixed? Thanks, Thomas

4 3

Re: [code-quality] [Python-projects] New warning about print parens not a good idea?
by Alexandre Fayolle ML Feb. 7, 2014

Feb. 7, 2014

On 06/02/2014 02:13, Dan Stromberg wrote: > > I noticed recently that pylint has begun warning about use of parens > on print statements in Python 2.x code. > > This seems reasonable on the face of it, except it deters writing code > that runs on 2.x and 3.x, unmodified. > > The error looks like: > C: 5, 0: Unnecessary parens after 'print' keyword (superfluous-parens) > > The offending line looks like: > print('hello') > > To Python 2.x, that is printing the result of a parenthesized > expression. To Python 3.x, it is of course a print function. > > I understand that doing something like: > print('number:', 1) > ...would be bad in a dual-codebase script, but having a single > argument works, and indeed is often a good idea for portability. > > Thoughts? > > -- > Dan Stromberg > > > _______________________________________________ > Python-Projects mailing list > Python-Projects(a)lists.logilab.org > http://lists.logilab.org/mailman/listinfo/python-projects There is a __future__ import to enable print_function in python 2[67]. I'm not sure if Pylint knows about it, though... cc-ing code-quality. Alexandre

5 4

pylint with simplejson & json
by Ali-Akber Saifee Feb. 5, 2014

Feb. 5, 2014

Hi, I'm getting mixed results from pylint when it inspects the result of simplejson.loads versus json.loads. I've documented some of my findings in the stackoverflow question at http://stackoverflow.com/questions/21545409/pylint-reports-maybe-no-member-… . I'm still not very clear as to why one implementation gets past pylint's checks while the other doesn't. Also out of curiosity - what would be the correct approach for dealing with a function that returns one of many primitives? best, *./ع*

1 0