PyChecker lives! Version 0.8.13 released.

[Edward K. Ream]

> As always, I'd like to hear your suggestions for common mistakes and bugs
than
can/should be found by PyChecker.

Hi Neal.  Thanks for these questions, and thanks for pychecker!

More nifty checks would always be welcome, but for me, some fairly small and
easy changes to pychecker might make a big difference.  I would suggest
putting more of your attention on giving the user more control over
pychecker.  In particular:

1.  Make it really clear and obvious in the documentation that it is
possible to drive pychecker using options.py.  Put some screenshots in the
docs, etc.

2.  Bring options.py up-to-date: support all options (or maybe document
things better).  For example, I've never been able to get the suppressions
dictionary in .pycheckrc to work, despite numerous experiments.  I miss not
being able to get this to work every time I run pychecker.

3. Add an option to options.py so one can specify a source file to run.
Better yet, allow a list of files to check.  As it is now, I have to browse
to the file.

4. Think about ways to make pychecker scriptable.  This is a biggie.  If it
is already, then _tell us about it_ (!!)

5.  Think about ways to make pychecker less monolithic and more useful for
unit testing.  In effect, I'd like unit tests to be able to run a specific
set of tests on specific files with specific options without having to mess
with options.py or .pycheckrc.  This would be so cool.

I don't believe any of these items would take a lot of technical work, but
they would make pychecker hugely more useful to me.

Thanks for listening.

Edward
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Edward K. Ream   email:  edreamleo at charter.net
Leo: Literate Editor with Outlines
Leo: http://webpages.charter.net/edreamleo/front.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------