sylvain.thenault at nospam.logilab.fr
Tue Jan 11 10:37:20 CET 2005
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:54:54 +0000, Frans Englich wrote:
> I take PyChecker partly as an recommender of good coding practice
You may alos be interested by Pylint .
Pylint is less advanced in bug detection than pychecker, but imho its good
coding practice detection is more advanced and configurable (as the pylint
author, i'm a little biased... ;), including naming conventions, code
duplication, bad code smells, presence of docstring, etc...
Side note : I wish that at some point we stop duplicated effort between
pylint and pychecker. In my opinion that would be nice if each one focus
on its strenghs (as i said bugs detection for pychecker and convention
violation / bad code smell for pylint). That would be even better if both
tools could be merged in one, but (at least last time I took a look at
pychecker) the internal architecture is so different that it's not an easy
task today. Any thoughts ?
Sylvain Thénault LOGILAB, Paris (France).
http://www.logilab.com http://www.logilab.fr http://www.logilab.org
More information about the Python-list