pychecker-list Mailing List for PyChecker

SourceForge Headquarters 225 Broadway Suite 1600 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 454-5900

Is it possible to use PyChecker in a way so that it does not generate 
any .pyc files from the checked .py files?

Regards,
Andy

Hi,
It seems that PyChecker passes its own command line arguments to any
Python source files that are being checked. This can lead to strange
effects if the checked file is a Python script that processes command
line args.

Is there a reason for passing the arguments on?

Regards,
Andy

On line 155 of python.py I belive the line should be changed from:

                    'strip': (types.StringType, 0, 0),
to
                    'strip': (types.StringType, 0, 2),

Currently this is giving false positives for expressions like:

x = foo.strip("\n")  # this function can have 1 to 2 arguments

Let me know if you need more info.

-- 
Dustin Lee
qhfgva=rot13(dustin)

Hello Neal and Eric,

Do you still maintain pychecker? I've found a bug. Here is a minimal test
case to reproduce it:

$ *pychecker --version*
0.8.19
$ *cat > testcase.py*
def trigger_len_of_None_in_validateKwArgs():
    message = "{foo}"
    return message.format(foo="bar")
$ *pychecker testcase.py*
Processing module testcase (testcase.py)...

Warnings...

testcase.py:3: INTERNAL ERROR -- STOPPED PROCESSING FUNCTION --
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pychecker/warn.py", line 242, in
_checkFunction
    _checkCode(code, codeSource)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pychecker/warn.py", line 153, in
_checkCode
    dispatch_func(oparg, operand, codeSource, code)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line
1690, in _CALL_FUNCTION
    _handleFunctionCall(codeSource, code, oparg)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line
474, in _handleFunctionCall
    check_arg_count)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line
250, in _checkBuiltin
    _validateKwArgs(code, methodInfo, func_name[1], kwArgs)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line
192, in _validateKwArgs
    if len(info) < 4:
TypeError: object of type 'NoneType' has no len()

I'm running this using Python 2.7.3 on Ubuntu 12.04.1.

This is a common pattern in my code where similar but slightly different
messages should be printed under different conditions. For example:

try:
    ...
except EnvironmentError as error:
    if error.filename:
        message = "{program}: error: {e.filename}: {e.strerror}"
    else:
        message = "{program}: error: {e.strerror}"
    print(message.format(program="my-program-name", e=error),
          file=sys.stderr)

This code triggers the bug, too.

Do you have any idea on why this pychecker error occurs and how one might
approach fixing it?

Best regards,
 -- Alexander

Hi,
  I have a slightly older version of pychecker on my Gentoo Linux.
Should I bother to provide you with a testcase for these system packages or is it enough
to know and reproduce?

[system path]/decimal.py:1346: INTERNAL ERROR -- STOPPED PROCESSING FUNCTION --
        Traceback (most recent call last):
          File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pychecker/warn.py", line 242, in _checkFunction
            _checkCode(code, codeSource)
          File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pychecker/warn.py", line 155, in _checkCode
            raise NotImplementedError('No DISPATCH member for op %r' % op)
        NotImplementedError: No DISPATCH member for op 28

[system path]/decimal.py:1993: INTERNAL ERROR -- STOPPED PROCESSING FUNCTION --
        Traceback (most recent call last):
          File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pychecker/warn.py", line 242, in _checkFunction
            _checkCode(code, codeSource)
          File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pychecker/warn.py", line 155, in _checkCode
            raise NotImplementedError('No DISPATCH member for op %r' % op)
        NotImplementedError: No DISPATCH member for op 28

[system path]/decimal.py:2146: Invalid arguments to (__pow__), got 4, expected 3
[system path]/decimal.py:2362: Invalid arguments to (__rpow__), got 3, expected 2
[system path]/decimal.py:2665: INTERNAL ERROR -- STOPPED PROCESSING FUNCTION --
        Traceback (most recent call last):
          File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pychecker/warn.py", line 242, in _checkFunction
            _checkCode(code, codeSource)
          File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pychecker/warn.py", line 155, in _checkCode
            raise NotImplementedError('No DISPATCH member for op %r' % op)
        NotImplementedError: No DISPATCH member for op 28

[system path]/subprocess.py:683: No global (msvcrt) found
[system path]/subprocess.py:709: Invalid arguments to (__del__), got 3, expected 1
[system path]/subprocess.py:1163: INTERNAL ERROR -- STOPPED PROCESSING FUNCTION --
        Traceback (most recent call last):
          File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pychecker/warn.py", line 242, in _checkFunction
            _checkCode(code, codeSource)
          File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pychecker/warn.py", line 155, in _checkCode
            raise NotImplementedError('No DISPATCH member for op %r' % op)
        NotImplementedError: No DISPATCH member for op 104

Best,
Martin

Thanks for the tip.  Since this is essentially a one character fix I'm
guessing this will be sufficient for now but if you think it will help I can
re-run the diff with -u.

dustin

On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Barry Scott <ba...@ba...> wrote:

> On 15 Apr 2011, at 21:13, Dustin Lee wrote:
>
> > Here is the use case and a fix for this error.  Let me know if there is a
> more efficient way to present this.
> >
> > groucho:~/projects/python/pychecker/pychecker-0.8.19
> > $ cat ../test_checkbuiltins.py
> > def foo_func():
> >     s = "foo"
> >     return '%s' % s.center(1)
> >
> > groucho:~/projects/python/pychecker/pychecker-0.8.19
> > $ python pychecker/checker.py ../test_checkbuiltins.py
> > Processing module test_checkbuiltins (../test_checkbuiltins.py)...
> >
> > Warnings...
> >
> > ../test_checkbuiltins.py:3: INTERNAL ERROR -- STOPPED PROCESSING FUNCTION
> --
> >         Traceback (most recent call last):
> >           File "pychecker/warn.py", line 242, in _checkFunction
> >             _checkCode(code, codeSource)
> >           File "pychecker/warn.py", line 153, in _checkCode
> >             dispatch_func(oparg, operand, codeSource, code)
> >           File "pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line 1690, in _CALL_FUNCTION
> >             _handleFunctionCall(codeSource, code, oparg)
> >           File "pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line 474, in
> _handleFunctionCall
> >             check_arg_count)
> >           File "pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line 256, in _checkBuiltin
> >             methodInfo[1], methodInfo[2])
> >         IndexError: tuple index out of range
> >
> > groucho:~/projects/python/pychecker/pychecker-0.8.19
> > $ diff -p pychecker/python.py
> ../pychecker-0.8.19-FIXED/pychecker/python.py
> > *** pychecker/python.py 2011-01-06 15:59:52.000000000 -0700
> > --- ../pychecker-0.8.19-FIXED/pychecker/python.py       2011-04-15
> 13:59:18.000000000 -0600
> > *************** if utils.pythonVersion() >= utils.PYTHON
> > *** 165,173 ****
> >
> >   if utils.pythonVersion() >= utils.PYTHON_2_4:
> >       _STRING_METHODS['rsplit'] = (types.StringType, 0, 2)
> > !     _STRING_METHODS['center'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2),
> > !     _STRING_METHODS['ljust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2),
> > !     _STRING_METHODS['rjust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2),
> >
> >   BUILTIN_METHODS = { types.DictType :
> >                       { 'clear': (types.NoneType, 0, 0),
> > --- 165,173 ----
> >
> >   if utils.pythonVersion() >= utils.PYTHON_2_4:
> >       _STRING_METHODS['rsplit'] = (types.StringType, 0, 2)
> > !     _STRING_METHODS['center'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2)
> > !     _STRING_METHODS['ljust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2)
> > !     _STRING_METHODS['rjust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2)
> >
> >   BUILTIN_METHODS = { types.DictType :
> >                       { 'clear': (types.NoneType, 0, 0),
> >
>
> Its preferred to use diff -u to submit patches as its easier to
> review them.
>
> Barry
>
>
> >
> > --
> > Dustin Lee
> > qhfgva=rot13(dustin)
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload
> > Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top
> > priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and
> improve
> > application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about
> boosting
> > the value of server virtualization.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev_______________________________________________
> > PyChecker-list mailing list
> > PyC...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pychecker-list
>
>

-- 
Dustin Lee
qhfgva=rot13(dustin)

On 15 Apr 2011, at 21:13, Dustin Lee wrote:

> Here is the use case and a fix for this error.  Let me know if there is a more efficient way to present this.
> 
> groucho:~/projects/python/pychecker/pychecker-0.8.19
> $ cat ../test_checkbuiltins.py
> def foo_func():
>     s = "foo"
>     return '%s' % s.center(1)
> 
> groucho:~/projects/python/pychecker/pychecker-0.8.19
> $ python pychecker/checker.py ../test_checkbuiltins.py
> Processing module test_checkbuiltins (../test_checkbuiltins.py)...
> 
> Warnings...
> 
> ../test_checkbuiltins.py:3: INTERNAL ERROR -- STOPPED PROCESSING FUNCTION --
>         Traceback (most recent call last):
>           File "pychecker/warn.py", line 242, in _checkFunction
>             _checkCode(code, codeSource)
>           File "pychecker/warn.py", line 153, in _checkCode
>             dispatch_func(oparg, operand, codeSource, code)
>           File "pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line 1690, in _CALL_FUNCTION
>             _handleFunctionCall(codeSource, code, oparg)
>           File "pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line 474, in _handleFunctionCall
>             check_arg_count)
>           File "pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line 256, in _checkBuiltin
>             methodInfo[1], methodInfo[2])
>         IndexError: tuple index out of range
>         
> groucho:~/projects/python/pychecker/pychecker-0.8.19
> $ diff -p pychecker/python.py ../pychecker-0.8.19-FIXED/pychecker/python.py
> *** pychecker/python.py 2011-01-06 15:59:52.000000000 -0700
> --- ../pychecker-0.8.19-FIXED/pychecker/python.py       2011-04-15 13:59:18.000000000 -0600
> *************** if utils.pythonVersion() >= utils.PYTHON
> *** 165,173 ****
>   
>   if utils.pythonVersion() >= utils.PYTHON_2_4:
>       _STRING_METHODS['rsplit'] = (types.StringType, 0, 2)
> !     _STRING_METHODS['center'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2),
> !     _STRING_METHODS['ljust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2),
> !     _STRING_METHODS['rjust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2),
>   
>   BUILTIN_METHODS = { types.DictType :
>                       { 'clear': (types.NoneType, 0, 0),
> --- 165,173 ----
>   
>   if utils.pythonVersion() >= utils.PYTHON_2_4:
>       _STRING_METHODS['rsplit'] = (types.StringType, 0, 2)
> !     _STRING_METHODS['center'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2)
> !     _STRING_METHODS['ljust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2)
> !     _STRING_METHODS['rjust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2)
>   
>   BUILTIN_METHODS = { types.DictType :
>                       { 'clear': (types.NoneType, 0, 0),
> 

Its preferred to use diff -u to submit patches as its easier to
review them.

Barry

> 
> -- 
> Dustin Lee
> qhfgva=rot13(dustin)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload 
> Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top
> priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and improve 
> application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about boosting 
> the value of server virtualization. http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev_______________________________________________
> PyChecker-list mailing list
> PyC...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pychecker-list

Here is the use case and a fix for this error.  Let me know if there is a
more efficient way to present this.

groucho:~/projects/python/pychecker/pychecker-0.8.19
$ cat ../test_checkbuiltins.py
def foo_func():
    s = "foo"
    return '%s' % s.center(1)

groucho:~/projects/python/pychecker/pychecker-0.8.19
$ python pychecker/checker.py ../test_checkbuiltins.py
Processing module test_checkbuiltins (../test_checkbuiltins.py)...

Warnings...

../test_checkbuiltins.py:3: INTERNAL ERROR -- STOPPED PROCESSING FUNCTION --
        Traceback (most recent call last):
          File "pychecker/warn.py", line 242, in _checkFunction
            _checkCode(code, codeSource)
          File "pychecker/warn.py", line 153, in _checkCode
            dispatch_func(oparg, operand, codeSource, code)
          File "pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line 1690, in _CALL_FUNCTION
            _handleFunctionCall(codeSource, code, oparg)
          File "pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line 474, in _handleFunctionCall
            check_arg_count)
          File "pychecker/CodeChecks.py", line 256, in _checkBuiltin
            methodInfo[1], methodInfo[2])
        IndexError: tuple index out of range

groucho:~/projects/python/pychecker/pychecker-0.8.19
$ diff -p pychecker/python.py ../pychecker-0.8.19-FIXED/pychecker/python.py
*** pychecker/python.py 2011-01-06 15:59:52.000000000 -0700
--- ../pychecker-0.8.19-FIXED/pychecker/python.py       2011-04-15
13:59:18.000000000 -0600
*************** if utils.pythonVersion() >= utils.PYTHON
*** 165,173 ****

  if utils.pythonVersion() >= utils.PYTHON_2_4:
      _STRING_METHODS['rsplit'] = (types.StringType, 0, 2)
!     _STRING_METHODS['center'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2),
!     _STRING_METHODS['ljust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2),
!     _STRING_METHODS['rjust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2),

  BUILTIN_METHODS = { types.DictType :
                      { 'clear': (types.NoneType, 0, 0),
--- 165,173 ----

  if utils.pythonVersion() >= utils.PYTHON_2_4:
      _STRING_METHODS['rsplit'] = (types.StringType, 0, 2)
!     _STRING_METHODS['center'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2)
!     _STRING_METHODS['ljust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2)
!     _STRING_METHODS['rjust'] = (types.StringType, 1, 2)

  BUILTIN_METHODS = { types.DictType :
                      { 'clear': (types.NoneType, 0, 0),

-- 
Dustin Lee
qhfgva=rot13(dustin)

This mail announces the release of PyChecker 0.8.19 'Two Seven'.

PyChecker is a tool for finding bugs in python source code.
It finds problems that are typically caught by a compiler for less
dynamic languages, like C and C++.  It is similar to lint.
Because of the dynamic nature of python, some warnings
may be incorrect; however, spurious warnings should be fairly infrequent.

PyChecker works in a combination of ways.  First, it imports each
module.  If there is an import error, the module cannot be processed.
The import provides some basic information about the module.  The code
for each function, class, and method is checked for possible problems.

Types of problems that can be found include:

 No global found (e.g., using a module without importing it)
 Passing the wrong number of parameters to functions/methods/constructors
 Passing the wrong number of parameters to builtin functions and methods
 Using format strings that don't match arguments
 Using class methods and attributes that don't exist
 Changing signature when overriding a method
 Redefining a function/class/method in the same scope
 Using a variable before setting it
 self not the first parameter to a method
 Unused globals and locals (module or variable)
 Unused function/method arguments (can ignore self)
 No doc strings in modules, classes, functions, and methods

For more information, see http://pychecker.sourceforge.net/
To file bugs, go to http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=382217&group_id=24686&func=browse

Hi everyone,

I just made a prerelease of pychecker:

http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/tmp/pychecker-0.8.18.2.tar.gz

You can read some more here:
http://thomas.apestaart.org/log/?p=1274

Or check the NEWS file in the tarball or CVS for a list of changes.

I plan to release Saturday.  I would appreciate any testing you could
give this.

Thomas

-- 

-- 
Don't you see that my heart's on fire
wicked wings that you spread round me sometimes
All I know is we've got to aim higher
Babe I wish that we'd go for the great escape
--
GStreamer - bringing multimedia to your desktop
http://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/

That's fantastic!  Thanks Thomas.

I'll look over the changes and try to test things out.

n
PS.  I love seeing all the recent changes go by.

On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Thomas Vander Stichele
<th...@ap...> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I had a moment of focus this weekend so I fixed up pychecker for Python
> 2.7:
>
> http://thomas.apestaart.org/log/?p=1268
>
> Right now it fails as many or even less tests than Python 2.6.
>
> I'm going to do some more general cleanup and possibly some
> implementations of opcodes I found missing by running it on some
> projects, but it's definitely a major and needed improvement.
>
> Feel free to give it a test and me some feedback before I release.  I
> don't want to end up with egg on my face for my first pychecker release.
>
> Thanks
> Thomas
>
> --
> I can't go away with you on a rock climbing weekend
> What if something's on TV and it's never shown again
> Just as well I'm not invited I'm afraid of heights
> I lied about being the outdoor type
> --
> MOAP - Maintaining your projects since 2006
> https://apestaart.org/moap/trac/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Lotusphere 2011
> Register now for Lotusphere 2011 and learn how
> to connect the dots, take your collaborative environment
> to the next level, and enter the era of Social Business.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/lotusphere-d2d
> _______________________________________________
> PyChecker-list mailing list
> PyC...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pychecker-list
>

Hi everyone,

I had a moment of focus this weekend so I fixed up pychecker for Python
2.7:

http://thomas.apestaart.org/log/?p=1268

Right now it fails as many or even less tests than Python 2.6.

I'm going to do some more general cleanup and possibly some
implementations of opcodes I found missing by running it on some
projects, but it's definitely a major and needed improvement.

Feel free to give it a test and me some feedback before I release.  I
don't want to end up with egg on my face for my first pychecker release.

Thanks
Thomas

-- 
I can't go away with you on a rock climbing weekend
What if something's on TV and it's never shown again
Just as well I'm not invited I'm afraid of heights
I lied about being the outdoor type
--
MOAP - Maintaining your projects since 2006
https://apestaart.org/moap/trac/

On 25 Apr 2010, at 18:49, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote:

> Hi Barry,
> 
>> Are you still planning to work on pychecker and fix problems?
> 
> I never plan, it happens when I get in the mood or run into some bug.
> 
>> I have some patches for pychecker on 2.6 but I need help to understand
>> how to fix some harder problems.
> 
> Ok, feel free to share.

I'll prep a set of patches for the problems I have already fixed and post
here.

> 
>> It seems that the python compiled code has changed in ways that trip up
>> pychecker. For example the code to figure out error in the use of format
>> strings reports warning show some perfectly good code. (No I cannot break
>> it in a small example - only in huge examples that I cannot make public).
> 
> Hm, that's going to be hard to figure out then if we can't make it
> reproducable.  Can you share the code with me for example ?

I cannot share the code, its (1) big and (2) my boss will not allow it
to be published.

I have been instrumenting the pychecker code to find out where the
format string bug is. I have it isolated to a single function. I can share
my debugging and hope that together we can figure out what to change.

Barry

Hi Barry,

> Are you still planning to work on pychecker and fix problems?

I never plan, it happens when I get in the mood or run into some bug.

> I have some patches for pychecker on 2.6 but I need help to understand
> how to fix some harder problems.

Ok, feel free to share.

> It seems that the python compiled code has changed in ways that trip up
> pychecker. For example the code to figure out error in the use of format
> strings reports warning show some perfectly good code. (No I cannot break
> it in a small example - only in huge examples that I cannot make public).

Hm, that's going to be hard to figure out then if we can't make it
reproducable.  Can you share the code with me for example ?

Thomas

-- 
Can we, like, have a dude conversation ?
I'm begging here !
--
Flumotion - the only way to stream!
http://www.flumotion.net/

Are you still planning to work on pychecker and fix problems?

I have some patches for pychecker on 2.6 but I need help to understand
how to fix some harder problems.

It seems that the python compiled code has changed in ways that trip up
pychecker. For example the code to figure out error in the use of format
strings reports warning show some perfectly good code. (No I cannot break
it in a small example - only in huge examples that I cannot make public).

Barry

On 30 Sep 2009, at 15:37, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote:

> Continuing on my cleanup path...
> 
>> 2.6: 16 failures
>> 2.5: 12 failures
>> 2.4: 6 failures
>> 2.3: 8 failures
> 
> What I'm focussing on so far is to bring all python versions on par with
> the one with the lowest failures, 2.4
> 
> I've first brought back 2.6 to the same failures as 2.5; basically, all
> new failures were due to the way BUILD_MAP has changed and can now take
> a numeric argument to presize the dict.  This argument however is not
> the number of items to consume from the stack.
> 
> Fixing that bug in pychecker made failures for 2.6 the same as for 2.5
> 
> As for between 2.5 and 2.4, I'm going over each of them and figuring out
> what happened.  A few have been fixed simply because Python 2.5
> introduced code generator optimizations that optimize the problematic
> code away before pychecker has a change to get at it; examples:
> 
> 55555 % 1 gets replaced with the constant 1
> ~~(10) (double negation) gets replaced with 10
> 
> Since pychecker has no way of knowing what the code was like before it
> got constified, there's no way to warn about it afaict.  (Please correct
> me if I'm wrong here).  So in those cases, I created a new expected
> results file, removing the warnings.
> 
> At least one of the differences I will need more help on, but for now
> the score is:
> 
> 2.6/2.5: 9
> 2.4: 6
> 2.3: 8
> 
> I have to say I feel a lot more comfortable changing tricky python code
> with these buildbots around to check all python versions for me...
> 
> Thomas
> 
> -- 
> P.S. You rock my world
> --
> savon - Saving your work to svn
> https://apestaart.org/thomas/trac/
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Come build with us! The BlackBerry&reg; Developer Conference in SF, CA
> is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your
> developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay 
> ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9&#45;12, 2009. Register now&#33;
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf
> _______________________________________________
> PyChecker-list mailing list
> PyC...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pychecker-list

Any work on pychecker to work with Python 3.1?

Or any suggestions of code analyzers for code using python 3.1?

(pylint and pyflake also don't know python 3.1.)

Hi,

TypeError: __import__() takes at most 4 arguments (5 given)

I see from the Python docs that __import__ can actually take 5 arguments,
so perhaps pychecker has fallen behind the latest Python version

__import__(name[, globals[, locals[, fromlist[, level]]]])

Tried adding another parameter:  level=None   to both definitions of __import__ in checker.py
Fixed my immediate problem.

Regards,
Peter Bobroff

Hi,

TypeError: __import__() takes at most 4 arguments (5 given)

I see from the Python docs that __import__ can actually take 5 arguments,
so perhaps pychecker has fallen behind the latest Python version

__import__(name[, globals[, locals[, fromlist[, level]]]])

Tried adding another parameter:  level=None   to both definitions of __import__ in checker.py
Fixed my immediate problem.

Regards,
Peter Bobroff

Hello

I just downloaded your PyChecker module and used it to check my code 
- really glad that we have it :) , thank you.

I would like to report a bug against version 0.8.18 - semi-private 
attributes and __getattr__ are not handled by this version properly.

Here is my code snippet that uses semi-private attributes and __getattr__

class PyHciPerforceServer(object):
     '''
     This is the class whose instances will start p4d.exe (Perforce server)
      - by default, use temporary directory and first available port
      - or use rootDir and port number as specified by the user
     '''

     def __getattr__(self, attributeName):
         '''
         Return object's attribute with attributeName
         '''

         # List of valid attribute names for . operation
         if(attributeName == 'port'):
             return self.__port
         if(attributeName == 'hostName'):
             return self.__hostName
         if(attributeName == 'rootDir'):
             return self.__rootDir
         if(attributeName == 'serverProcess'):
             return self.__serverProcess
         if(attributeName == 'isRunning'):
             if self.__serverProcess == None:
                 return False
             else:
                 # Return true if Perforce server process is running
                 return self.__serverProcess.poll() == None

         # If we got here, attributeName is invalid
         raise AttributeError(attributeName)

     def __init__(self, rootDir = None, port = 0):
         '''
         Initialize object attributes and start the server on given rootDir
         and port
         '''

         # Initialize all of object's attributes
         self.__port          = None
         self.__hostName      = None
         self.__rootDir       = None
         self.__serverProcess = None

         # Start Perforce server using given rootDir and port number
         # Using default parameters will start the server in a temp root dir
         # and on the first available port
         self.start(rootDir, port)
[ SNIP ]

Here's what PyChecker reports for this class:

Warnings...

PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:71: Object (server) has no attribute (isRunning)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:72: Object (server) has no attribute (port)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:73: Object (server) has no attribute (rootDir)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:74: Object (server) has no attribute 
(serverProcess)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:75: Object (server) has no attribute (hostName)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:93: Object (server) has no attribute (isRunning)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:105: Object (server) has no attribute (port)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:106: Object (server) has no attribute (rootDir)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:107: Object (server) has no attribute 
(serverProcess)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:108: Object (server) has no attribute (hostName)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:109: Object (server) has no attribute (isRunning)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:132: Object (server) has no attribute (port)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:133: Object (server) has no attribute (rootDir)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:134: Object (server) has no attribute 
(serverProcess)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:135: Object (server) has no attribute (hostName)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:136: Object (server) has no attribute (isRunning)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:167: Object (server) has no attribute (port)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:168: Object (server) has no attribute (rootDir)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:169: Object (server) has no attribute 
(serverProcess)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:170: Object (server) has no attribute (hostName)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:171: Object (server) has no attribute (isRunning)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:204: Object (server) has no attribute (isRunning)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:212: Object (server) has no attribute (port)
PyHciPerforceServer_Test.py:213: Object (server) has no attribute (rootDir)

Thank you

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ilona Chodnicka
Software Engineer, Senior
Qualcomm CDMA Technologies
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

... if I stop to think about it, it becomes *PREMEDITATED*

Continuing on my cleanup path...

> 2.6: 16 failures
> 2.5: 12 failures
> 2.4: 6 failures
> 2.3: 8 failures

What I'm focussing on so far is to bring all python versions on par with
the one with the lowest failures, 2.4

I've first brought back 2.6 to the same failures as 2.5; basically, all
new failures were due to the way BUILD_MAP has changed and can now take
a numeric argument to presize the dict.  This argument however is not
the number of items to consume from the stack.

Fixing that bug in pychecker made failures for 2.6 the same as for 2.5

As for between 2.5 and 2.4, I'm going over each of them and figuring out
what happened.  A few have been fixed simply because Python 2.5
introduced code generator optimizations that optimize the problematic
code away before pychecker has a change to get at it; examples:

55555 % 1 gets replaced with the constant 1
~~(10) (double negation) gets replaced with 10

Since pychecker has no way of knowing what the code was like before it
got constified, there's no way to warn about it afaict.  (Please correct
me if I'm wrong here).  So in those cases, I created a new expected
results file, removing the warnings.

At least one of the differences I will need more help on, but for now
the score is:

2.6/2.5: 9
2.4: 6
2.3: 8

I have to say I feel a lot more comfortable changing tricky python code
with these buildbots around to check all python versions for me...

Thomas

-- 
P.S. You rock my world
--
savon - Saving your work to svn
https://apestaart.org/thomas/trac/

Hi,

(starts feeling like an echo in here :))

> Ok, I set up my jhbuild build scripts to build 3 python versions on one
> of the slaves (2.3, 2.4, 2.5)
> 
> I still need to set up a 2.6 one somewhere.

Done now.

> > After that, I still need to integrate with cvs hooks to send out mails
> > and trigger builds.

Done too.  Also, fixed a small bug where test runs on the same machine
overwrote the other tests.  Now I seem to get consistent build results,
and here are the scores:

2.6: 16 failures
2.5: 12 failures
2.4: 6 failures
2.3: 8 failures

I'm thinking atm it would be nice to make a test matrix, but since the
goal is to fix all tests, then keep them fixed, this may not be so
useful.

Thomas

-- 
Be a blanket for my bones
be a place that I call home
--
savon - Saving your work to svn
https://apestaart.org/thomas/trac/

Hi,

some followup:

> There's 5 builders right now.  It's not super-useful yet since:
> 
> - you don't obviously see what python version they run
> - we don't cover all python versions yet

Ok, I set up my jhbuild build scripts to build 3 python versions on one
of the slaves (2.3, 2.4, 2.5)

I still need to set up a 2.6 one somewhere.

> After that, I still need to integrate with cvs hooks to send out mails
> and trigger builds.

This still needs doing.  On the plus side, it seems anoncvs on sf now
syncs immediately, so that's good.

Additionally, I wrote a quick parser for the TESTS FAILED: line at the
end, so the builders report how many tests failed.  This should make it
easier to track when we actually go back to fixing those failures and
make sure we fix them across all python versions.

Suggestions welcome!
Thomas

-- 
too tired to eat
too hungry to sleep
--
MOAP - Maintaining your projects since 2006
https://apestaart.org/moap/trac/

I haven't fixed anything in pychecker lately because I have a known bug
I want to fix, and before I did so I wanted to set up some buildbots.

Ok, well, that part of the yak shave has started, so I give to you:

http://build.fluendo.com:8200/

There's 5 builders right now.  It's not super-useful yet since:

- you don't obviously see what python version they run
- we don't cover all python versions yet

However, I have some other scripts that set up different python
versions, and then I will add some builders for all useful python
versions.

After that, I still need to integrate with cvs hooks to send out mails
and trigger builds.

And after that, I can fix the actual darn bug I have on my plate :)

Enjoy,

Thomas

-- 
I willed myself to become a machine whose product was distance.
--
savon - Saving your work to svn
https://apestaart.org/thomas/trac/

hi ,

def test(p1,p2):
       if(not p2):
               print "not p2"
               *return*
       if(not p1):
               print "p2"
       print "good to be here"

In the above example ,pychecker is showing unreachable code warning at
"return " statement. I am not able to understand the reason for this.Is it a
bug with pychecker ?
Thanks in advance
-- 
PHANI SHANKAR

As I'm adding opcodes, I'm wondering about what should be checked for
some of them.

For example, DELETE_SLICE3:

def func():
    d = 1
    del d[1:2]

When you execute func, you would get:

TypeError: 'int' object does not support item deletion

It sounds to me like pychecker should generate a warning for this code,
no ?

How should I do this ? What can I do to figure out if the object being
sliced supports item deletion and/or slicing ?

Thomas

-- 
Did you get older doing nothing today?
Don't you wanna stop complaining?
--
URGent, best radio on the net - 24/7 !
http://urgent.fm/

2002	Jan	Feb (16)	Mar (72)	Apr (12)	May (38)	Jun (37)	Jul (41)	Aug (25)	Sep (22)	Oct (9)	Nov (10)	Dec (24)
2003	Jan (19)	Feb (23)	Mar (22)	Apr (23)	May (38)	Jun (99)	Jul (81)	Aug (45)	Sep (17)	Oct (29)	Nov (49)	Dec (76)
2004	Jan (96)	Feb (79)	Mar (54)	Apr (77)	May (67)	Jun (48)	Jul (40)	Aug (22)	Sep (16)	Oct (23)	Nov (35)	Dec (30)
2005	Jan (6)	Feb (2)	Mar (8)	Apr (4)	May (4)	Jun (4)	Jul (13)	Aug (13)	Sep (18)	Oct (23)	Nov (10)	Dec (28)
2006	Jan (15)	Feb (13)	Mar (11)	Apr (9)	May (11)	Jun (16)	Jul (16)	Aug (8)	Sep (26)	Oct (53)	Nov (71)	Dec (66)
2007	Jan (43)	Feb (74)	Mar (26)	Apr (18)	May (31)	Jun (30)	Jul (33)	Aug (60)	Sep (29)	Oct (16)	Nov	Dec
2008	Jan (1)	Feb (1)	Mar	Apr (4)	May	Jun (1)	Jul (13)	Aug (9)	Sep (3)	Oct (1)	Nov (2)	Dec
2009	Jan (1)	Feb	Mar	Apr	May (1)	Jun (4)	Jul	Aug (1)	Sep (4)	Oct (1)	Nov (1)	Dec (1)
2010	Jan	Feb (1)	Mar	Apr (4)	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec (2)
2011	Jan (2)	Feb	Mar	Apr (1)	May	Jun	Jul (2)	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2012	Jan	Feb	Mar (1)	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep (1)	Oct	Nov	Dec
2013	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr (1)	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2014	Jan	Feb	Mar (2)	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec

pychecker-list Mailing List for PyChecker

pychecker-list — General list to discuss PyChecker issues