Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!xlned.com!feeder7.xlned.com!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path: <d@davea.name>
X-Original-To: python-list@python.org
Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status: OK 0.007
X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'operator': 0.03; 'revision': 0.05; 'that?': 0.05; 'subject:test': 0.07; 'python': 0.09; 'imho.': 0.09; 'operator,': 0.09; 'subject:language': 0.09; 'subject:version': 0.09; '(like': 0.15; 'constructs': 0.16; 'fail,': 0.16; 'ternary': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.17; 'test.': 0.17; 'tests.': 0.17; 'tests': 0.18; '>>>': 0.18; 'putting': 0.20; 'trying': 0.21; 'idea': 0.24; 'testing': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply- To:1': 0.25; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'am,': 0.27; 'separate': 0.27; 'mind.': 0.27; 'newer': 0.27; 'run': 0.28; 'install': 0.29; 'code': 0.31; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.33; 'version': 0.34; 'subject:?': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'test': 0.36; 'possible': 0.37; 'why': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.38; 'unit': 0.38; 'mean': 0.38; 'some': 0.38; 'sure': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:192': 0.39; 'received:192.168': 0.40; 'subject:-': 0.40; 'your': 0.60; "you've": 0.61; 'night': 0.62; 'header:Reply-To:1': 0.68; 'received:74.208': 0.71; 'sounds': 0.71; 'reply-to:no real name:2**0': 0.72; 'beforehand': 0.84; 'checker': 0.84; 'springs': 0.84; 'safer': 0.91; 'gaps': 0.93
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 10:06:30 -0500
From: Dave Angel <d@davea.name>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121011 Thunderbird/16.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: pylint or similar to test version-specific language constructs?
References: <1454e34f-5ca0-4f49-ad29-c99df4fdd322@gu9g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <mailman.349.1357776502.2939.python-list@python.org> <QeednQoFKKHXUHLNnZ2dnUVZ8gadnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <QeednQoFKKHXUHLNnZ2dnUVZ8gadnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:1aEgJMRyZ2ffwOc5QQFW/nH//n5e6ZIWmkVPcLZJCgr uSqX2YK03YI7H2aHz5Ca4Ny2C098t95NizpDQsXKwCxfGzunIW zz5v/Wyi3HKNuBDEo0W+6pHEnZBPAhv1nqSoQfAng9Sa3BZiEY S+g4luiIYys4cNKqp8miUPQ3zhdymfyWF65GyL1EJSmOEIDIDF 7ibkcYNxZPyv5BN79UHy/rdW6U2ijq8/UlbNvn1p/xYD4osiY2 zvw0ne9tYcePScjY4KrPDANjspo+VVBsN+tNNESBRm8ebm0ceB HISk4UNiGXSCBt9KMe8+ydHQFAJO5jOHqeOHTaI6LqQIbKkjQ= =
X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: d@davea.name
List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post: <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help: <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.401.1357916818.2939.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 33
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace: 1357916818 news.xs4all.nl 6975 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:39866
X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:36626

On 01/11/2013 03:29 AM, The Night Tripper wrote:
> Gisle Vanem wrote:
>
>> "jkn" <jkn_gg@nicorp.f9.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>    I have to write python code which must run on an old version of
>>> python (v2.4) as well as a newer (v2.7). I am using pylint and would
>>> like to check if is possible to check with pylint the use of operators
>>> etc. which are not present in 2.4; the ternary operator springs to
>>> mind.
>> No idea about PyLint. Why not install Python 2.4 and test
>> with that? Sounds safer IMHO.
> I do have Python 2.4 installed; but I would like a checker that warned me 
> beforehand about trying to use constructs (like the ternary operator, 
> decorators) which are version-specific.
>
>     J^n
>

Not sure what you mean by beforehand.  Don't you run all your unit tests
before putting each revision of your code into production?  So run those
tests twice, once on 2.7, and once on 2.4.  A unit test that's testing
code with a ternary operator will fail, without any need for a separate
test.

if it doesn't, then you've got some coverage gaps in your unit tests.



-- 

DaveA