Re [Svnmerge] Noisy pychecker on svnmerge.py

[Giovanni Bajo]

Madan U S <madan at collab.net> wrote:

>> Last time I checked, many were bogus ones. For instance, I'm opposed to
>> avoid the "is [not] None" paradigm.
>
> Well, now, I dont see a single "is [not] None" error from pychecker.
> Anyways, why were you oppposed to it?

None is interned in CPython. There's no reason to go through the ==
semantic.

> I will start working on the rest... will send multiple fixes in every
> patch. I hope this is fine.

What are the other issues? I don't like patches to shut up warnings caused
by bugs/imperfections in external tools. If the tools help finding out real
bugs, that's fine, let's fix them. But I'm -1 on any patch that tries to
adjust code so to shut down non-issues and/or change our code to follow some
coding convention (like the "is None" issue) the tools unilaterally decided
it's the Good One(TM).
-- 
Giovanni Bajo