Message219892
| Author | gvanrossum |
|---|---|
| Recipients | alex, glyph, gvanrossum, ncoghlan |
| Date | 2014-06-06.16:46:23 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1402073183.98.0.247520498043.issue21669@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
I also found some amusing false positives (syntax errors that weren't valid print statements in Python 2):
print [/
print /
print ) # but not "print)" !
print]
None of these matter though. Perhaps more concerning is how many things are valid syntax, despite making little sense:
print [42]
print
Still I like the idea -- even if it only catches 50% of all print statements that would still be a huge win. (And I think it's probably closer to 80%.) |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2014-06-06 16:46:24 | gvanrossum | set | recipients: + gvanrossum, ncoghlan, glyph, alex |
| 2014-06-06 16:46:23 | gvanrossum | set | messageid: <1402073183.98.0.247520498043.issue21669@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2014-06-06 16:46:23 | gvanrossum | link | issue21669 messages |
| 2014-06-06 16:46:23 | gvanrossum | create | |