On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 3:02 PM, Georg Brandl <g.bra...@gmx.net> wrote: > Benjamin Peterson schrieb: >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 5:25 AM, Samuele Pedroni <pedro...@openend.se> wrote: >>> Didn't a test fail because of this? seems the underlying issue is that this >>> part of the stdlib didn't have enough test coverage. It seems that having >>> very good/improving test coverage like is recommended for 3rd-party project >>> wanting to switch would be a good goal for 3.0 evolution too. We know from >>> PyPy experience that while always improving the test suite coverage is quite >>> spotty at times. >> >> No, a test didn't fail. Our new distutils maintainer, Tarek Ziade, >> though, has been increasing the distutils test coverage greatly. > > In addition to testing, this specific issue could have been found easily by > running something like pylint over the stdlib, because undefined globals > are one of the things they can detect with 100% accuracy...
Oh, does pylint support py3k now? > > The hard thing about pylint of course is to get the signal/noise ratio right > :) -- Regards, Benjamin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
