Added a check to raise error on missing whitespace around arithmetic … #1143
Conversation
| @@ -2876,6 +2876,10 @@ Release date: 2003-09-12 | |||
|
|
|||
| * easy functional test infrastructure | |||
|
|
|||
| * Raise bad-whitespace error on arithmetic operators that miss spaces | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you check the indentation here? Seems to use tabs or it has too many spaces. Also, this uses the wrong section for the release, it should be the latest.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also, mind adding a new entry in What's New as well?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have added it in the right location. Is that it? Or should it be added any where else too?
| @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ | |||
| # pylint: disable=missing-docstring,invalid-name,unused-argument | |||
| def sample_function(*args, **kwargs): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How does this behave to operator with different priorities? For instance, PEP 8 recommends something as x = x*2 - 1 instead of x = x * 2 - 1.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
pep8 throws an E226 error on a = a*4 + 2
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Contradicting to the statement in the documentation
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#whitespace-in-expressions-and-statements
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FWIW pycodestyle (which is what pep8 was renamed to) has E226 disabled by default. I think having it enabled by default in pylint would be a mistake.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In that case, should we have a separate error message for this which is disabled by default?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this could be made to work with some tweaking. I think this makes sense in the cases where both operands are not BinOps and neither is the parent (with the exception of being the RHS in a AssignTypeMixin). This would catch x = a*4 but allow a = a*4 + 2. What do you think @PCManticore @The-Compiler ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@rowillia sure I will try it out.. Can you please explain a bit?
|
@aswinm Did you see my comment here - #1143 (comment) . Is this something you think you could try out? As is, as @PCManticore pointed out this linter would not comply with PEP8. |
|
Thank you for the pull request @aswinm I decided to close this issue. This is a PEP 8 rule that is not unanimously accepted and, as @The-Compiler mentioned already, |
Fixes / new features
Fix for issue #1110