[chirp_devel] Fwd: [CHIRP - Feature #159] (In Progress) Get pylint happy with chirp

[Dan Smith]

> FWIW, I have patches to de-lint bitwise_grammar.py and bitwise.py, and I 
> think the changes are uniformly beneficial to the code.

It's not the bitwise code itself, but the code that uses it that is
likely most probematic.

> The most widespread problem has been the lack of docstrings.  Maybe it has matured since you last used it?

I use it almost every day, so, no. There are aspects of python that
cannot be statically analyzed -- it's part of the nature of the thing.
For example:

  class Test(object):
      def __init__(self, value):
          setattr(self, 'test_attribute', value)

  t = Test()
  print t.test_attribute

yields this:

  E:  6, 6: Instance of 'Test' has no 'test_attribute' member (no-member)

Bitwise is full of that sort of stuff by nature. It's one of the most
useful things that pylint can do (identifying things that a compiler
would have caught, like using non-existent identifiers), yet it's going
to fail miserably on any code that uses bitwise (read: almost all of chirp).

> It gets a solid endorsement from me, because it has already flagged some 
> real errors in the code that need to be fixed.  Indeed, I was originally 
> skeptical that it would be worthwhile, since we already comply with 
> pep8; however, these results made me think that it can be tuned to yield 
> significant ongoing value for this project.

I'd rather you just write unit tests for things like your logger module
and catch the issues that way. Further, like pep8, pylint is a moving
target and keeping the config file up to date such that it continues to
run on newer versions is actual work, and not work I personally want to do.

--Dan

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://intrepid.danplanet.com/pipermail/chirp_devel/attachments/20150308/b90f6fdc/attachment-0001.bin