QuantEcon / QuantEcon/QuantEcon.py
Conventions for linting the code?
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
discuss
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 2.4k
- Forks
- 2.3k
- Avg merge
- 3d 3h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 3
Description
I ran flake8 --ignore=F401,E501,E226,E231,W291,E241 quantecon. Found ~405 lint errors excluding the errors I explicitly ignore. There are unused variables and imports scattered around. Would it be fine if I apply yapf to the codebase?
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reviewing the reported flake8 command and its roughly 405 remaining errors across quantecon, then examine whether the proposed YAPF conventions fit the project. The scope, accepted rules, and completion criteria need maintainer agreement; done would mean an agreed linting policy and a consistent application of it.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- tooling
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100