Pylint、PyChecker 还是 PyFlakes?

发布于 2024-08-04 15:38:43 字数 80 浏览 6 评论 0原文

我想获得有关这些工具的一些反馈:

  • 功能;
  • 适应性;
  • 易用性和学习曲线。

I would like to get some feedback on these tools on:

  • features;
  • adaptability;
  • ease of use and learning curve.

如果你对这篇内容有疑问,欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论,获取更多帮助,或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。

扫码二维码加入Web技术交流群

发布评论

需要 登录 才能够评论, 你可以免费 注册 一个本站的账号。

评论(2

始终不够 2024-08-11 15:38:43

好吧,我有点好奇,所以我在提出问题后就自己测试了这三个;-)

好吧,这不是一个非常严肃的评论,但我可以说的是:

我尝试了这些工具以下脚本的默认设置(这很重要,因为您几乎可以选择检查规则):

#!/usr/local/bin/python
# by Daniel Rosengren modified by e-satis

import sys, time
stdout = sys.stdout

BAILOUT = 16
MAX_ITERATIONS = 1000

class Iterator(object) :

    def __init__(self):

        print 'Rendering...'
        for y in xrange(-39, 39):
            stdout.write('\n')
            for x in xrange(-39, 39):
                if self.mandelbrot(x/40.0, y/40.0) :
                    stdout.write(' ')
                else:
                    stdout.write('*')


    def mandelbrot(self, x, y):
        cr = y - 0.5
        ci = x
        zi = 0.0
        zr = 0.0

        for i in xrange(MAX_ITERATIONS) :
            temp = zr * zi
            zr2 = zr * zr
            zi2 = zi * zi
            zr = zr2 - zi2 + cr
            zi = temp + temp + ci

            if zi2 + zr2 > BAILOUT:
                return i

        return 0

t = time.time()
Iterator()
print '\nPython Elapsed %.02f' % (time.time() - t)

结果:

  • PyChecker 很麻烦,因为它编译模块来分析它。如果您不希望代码运行(例如,它执行 SQL 查询),那就不好了。
  • PyFlakes 应该很轻。事实上,它认为代码是完美的。我正在寻找一些非常严重的东西,所以我认为我不会去做。
  • PyLint 非常健谈,对代码的评分为 3/10(天啊,我是个肮脏的编码员!)。

PyLint 的优点:

  • 非常具有描述性和准确的报告。
  • 检测一些代码气味。这里它告诉我放弃我的类来编写带有函数的东西,因为面向对象方法在这种特定情况下是无用的。我知道一些事情,但从未期望计算机会告诉我:-p
  • 完全更正的代码运行得更快(没有类,没有引用绑定...)。
  • 由法国团队制作。好吧,这并不是对每个人都有好处,但我喜欢它;-)

Pylint 的缺点:

  • 有些规则非常严格。我知道你可以更改它,并且默认值是匹配 PEP8,但是写“for x in seq”是犯罪行为吗?显然是的,因为你不能写少于 3 个字母的变量名。我会改变这一点。
  • 非常非常健谈。准备好用你的眼睛。

更正的脚本(带有惰性文档字符串和变量名称):

#!/usr/local/bin/python
# by Daniel Rosengren, modified by e-satis
"""
Module doctring
"""


import time
from sys import stdout

BAILOUT = 16
MAX_ITERATIONS = 1000

def mandelbrot(dim_1, dim_2):
    """
    function doc string
    """
    cr1 = dim_1 - 0.5
    ci1 = dim_2
    zi1 = 0.0
    zr1 = 0.0

    for i in xrange(MAX_ITERATIONS) :
        temp = zr1 * zi1
        zr2 = zr1 * zr1
        zi2 = zi1 * zi1
        zr1 = zr2 - zi2 + cr1
        zi1 = temp + temp + ci1

        if zi2 + zr2 > BAILOUT:
            return i

    return 0

def execute() :
    """
    func doc string
    """
    print 'Rendering...'
    for dim_1 in xrange(-39, 39):
        stdout.write('\n')
        for dim_2 in xrange(-39, 39):
            if mandelbrot(dim_1/40.0, dim_2/40.0) :
                stdout.write(' ')
            else:
                stdout.write('*')


START_TIME = time.time()
execute()
print '\nPython Elapsed %.02f' % (time.time() - START_TIME)

感谢 Rudiger Wolf ,我发现 pep8 的功能正如其名称所示:匹配 PEP8。它发现了一些 Pylint 没有发现的语法禁忌。但 Pylint 发现了一些与 PEP8 没有明确关联但很有趣的东西。这两种工具都很有趣并且互补。

最终我将使用两者,因为它们确实很容易安装(通过包或安装工具)并且输出文本很容易链接。

让您了解一下它们的输出:

pep8

./python_mandelbrot.py:4:11: E401 multiple imports on one line
./python_mandelbrot.py:10:1: E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1
./python_mandelbrot.py:10:23: E203 whitespace before ':'
./python_mandelbrot.py:15:80: E501 line too long (108 characters)
./python_mandelbrot.py:23:1: W291 trailing whitespace
./python_mandelbrot.py:41:5: E301 expected 1 blank line, found 3

Pylint

************* Module python_mandelbrot
C: 15: Line too long (108/80)
C: 61: Line too long (85/80)
C:  1: Missing docstring
C:  5: Invalid name "stdout" (should match (([A-Z_][A-Z0-9_]*)|(__.*__))$)
C: 10:Iterator: Missing docstring
C: 15:Iterator.__init__: Invalid name "y" (should match [a-z_][a-z0-9_]{2,30}$)
C: 17:Iterator.__init__: Invalid name "x" (should match [a-z_][a-z0-9_]{2,30}$)

[...] and a very long report with useful stats like :

Duplication
-----------

+-------------------------+------+---------+-----------+
|                         |now   |previous |difference |
+=========================+======+=========+===========+
|nb duplicated lines      |0     |0        |=          |
+-------------------------+------+---------+-----------+
|percent duplicated lines |0.000 |0.000    |=          |
+-------------------------+------+---------+-----------+

Well, I am a bit curious, so I just tested the three myself right after asking the question ;-)

Ok, this is not a very serious review, but here is what I can say:

I tried the tools with the default settings (it's important because you can pretty much choose your check rules) on the following script:

#!/usr/local/bin/python
# by Daniel Rosengren modified by e-satis

import sys, time
stdout = sys.stdout

BAILOUT = 16
MAX_ITERATIONS = 1000

class Iterator(object) :

    def __init__(self):

        print 'Rendering...'
        for y in xrange(-39, 39):
            stdout.write('\n')
            for x in xrange(-39, 39):
                if self.mandelbrot(x/40.0, y/40.0) :
                    stdout.write(' ')
                else:
                    stdout.write('*')


    def mandelbrot(self, x, y):
        cr = y - 0.5
        ci = x
        zi = 0.0
        zr = 0.0

        for i in xrange(MAX_ITERATIONS) :
            temp = zr * zi
            zr2 = zr * zr
            zi2 = zi * zi
            zr = zr2 - zi2 + cr
            zi = temp + temp + ci

            if zi2 + zr2 > BAILOUT:
                return i

        return 0

t = time.time()
Iterator()
print '\nPython Elapsed %.02f' % (time.time() - t)

As a result:

  • PyChecker is troublesome because it compiles the module to analyze it. If you don't want your code to run (e.g, it performs a SQL query), that's bad.
  • PyFlakes is supposed to be light. Indeed, it decided that the code was perfect. I am looking for something quite severe so I don't think I'll go for it.
  • PyLint has been very talkative and rated the code 3/10 (OMG, I'm a dirty coder !).

Strong points of PyLint:

  • Very descriptive and accurate report.
  • Detect some code smells. Here it told me to drop my class to write something with functions because the OO approach was useless in this specific case. Something I knew, but never expected a computer to tell me :-p
  • The fully corrected code run faster (no class, no reference binding...).
  • Made by a French team. OK, it's not a plus for everybody, but I like it ;-)

Cons of Pylint:

  • Some rules are really strict. I know that you can change it and that the default is to match PEP8, but is it such a crime to write 'for x in seq'? Apparently yes because you can't write a variable name with less than 3 letters. I will change that.
  • Very very talkative. Be ready to use your eyes.

Corrected script (with lazy doc strings and variable names):

#!/usr/local/bin/python
# by Daniel Rosengren, modified by e-satis
"""
Module doctring
"""


import time
from sys import stdout

BAILOUT = 16
MAX_ITERATIONS = 1000

def mandelbrot(dim_1, dim_2):
    """
    function doc string
    """
    cr1 = dim_1 - 0.5
    ci1 = dim_2
    zi1 = 0.0
    zr1 = 0.0

    for i in xrange(MAX_ITERATIONS) :
        temp = zr1 * zi1
        zr2 = zr1 * zr1
        zi2 = zi1 * zi1
        zr1 = zr2 - zi2 + cr1
        zi1 = temp + temp + ci1

        if zi2 + zr2 > BAILOUT:
            return i

    return 0

def execute() :
    """
    func doc string
    """
    print 'Rendering...'
    for dim_1 in xrange(-39, 39):
        stdout.write('\n')
        for dim_2 in xrange(-39, 39):
            if mandelbrot(dim_1/40.0, dim_2/40.0) :
                stdout.write(' ')
            else:
                stdout.write('*')


START_TIME = time.time()
execute()
print '\nPython Elapsed %.02f' % (time.time() - START_TIME)

Thanks to Rudiger Wolf, I discovered pep8 that does exactly what its name suggests: matching PEP8. It has found several syntax no-nos that Pylint did not. But Pylint found stuff that was not specifically linked to PEP8 but interesting. Both tools are interesting and complementary.

Eventually I will use both since there are really easy to install (via packages or setuptools) and the output text is so easy to chain.

To give you a little idea of their output:

pep8:

./python_mandelbrot.py:4:11: E401 multiple imports on one line
./python_mandelbrot.py:10:1: E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1
./python_mandelbrot.py:10:23: E203 whitespace before ':'
./python_mandelbrot.py:15:80: E501 line too long (108 characters)
./python_mandelbrot.py:23:1: W291 trailing whitespace
./python_mandelbrot.py:41:5: E301 expected 1 blank line, found 3

Pylint:

************* Module python_mandelbrot
C: 15: Line too long (108/80)
C: 61: Line too long (85/80)
C:  1: Missing docstring
C:  5: Invalid name "stdout" (should match (([A-Z_][A-Z0-9_]*)|(__.*__))$)
C: 10:Iterator: Missing docstring
C: 15:Iterator.__init__: Invalid name "y" (should match [a-z_][a-z0-9_]{2,30}$)
C: 17:Iterator.__init__: Invalid name "x" (should match [a-z_][a-z0-9_]{2,30}$)

[...] and a very long report with useful stats like :

Duplication
-----------

+-------------------------+------+---------+-----------+
|                         |now   |previous |difference |
+=========================+======+=========+===========+
|nb duplicated lines      |0     |0        |=          |
+-------------------------+------+---------+-----------+
|percent duplicated lines |0.000 |0.000    |=          |
+-------------------------+------+---------+-----------+
别再吹冷风 2024-08-11 15:38:43

pep8 最近已添加到 PyPi。

  • pep8 - Python 样式指南检查器
  • pep8 是一个工具,用于根据 PEP 8 中的一些样式约定检查您的 Python 代码。

现在根据 pep8 检查您的代码非常容易。

请参阅http://pypi.python.org/pypi/pep8

pep8 was recently added to PyPi.

  • pep8 - Python style guide checker
  • pep8 is a tool to check your Python code against some of the style conventions in PEP 8.

It is now super easy to check your code against pep8.

See http://pypi.python.org/pypi/pep8

~没有更多了~
我们使用 Cookies 和其他技术来定制您的体验包括您的登录状态等。通过阅读我们的 隐私政策 了解更多相关信息。 单击 接受 或继续使用网站,即表示您同意使用 Cookies 和您的相关数据。
原文