-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
Number of jobs affects score #1387
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
Can you try running with pylint 1.6.4 and see if this still reproduces? |
OK I did that, still reproduces. With 1 job my score is 8.95 and with 2 or more my score is 9.13 |
@Xylon2 Can you run diff on summary between two runs and include results here? Accoring to my experiment, only thing missed by us is bunch of
Looking at multiprocessing code - it's quite obvious it won't work right now - all modules are put on queue and consumed independently, while duplicated code checker has to have multiple files on input for it to work. We would have to differentiate between parallable and not parrallable checkers and handle them in different way. |
$ pylint --version
|
I've encountered that too. To properly detect duplicate code, pylint must be run with I've verified this by saving the following script as 2 duplicate files, import os
import sys
def main():
print('test')
print(sys.argv)
print(os.environ)
sys.exit(1)
if __name__ == '__main__':
main() and running: pylint --jobs=2 test1.py test2.py
pylint --jobs=1 test1.py test2.py Only the second command reported duplicate code. |
Steps to reproduce
I don't know if this bug happens with all code but it happens with the Taskenizer code tree:
$ fossil clone https://www.suckmore.uk/cgi-bin/repo/Taskenizer ~/tasrepo.fossil
$ mkdir taskenizer
$ cd taskenizer
$ fossil open ~/tasrepo.fossil
$ pylint3 --rcfile='pylintrc' taskenizer/
Now edit the jobs to 1 in pylintrc and run again
Current behavior
Score changes
Expected behavior
Changing number of jobs should not affect score.
pylint --version output
pylint3 1.5.2,
astroid 1.4.4
Python 3.4.2 (default, Oct 8 2014, 10:45:20)
[GCC 4.9.1]
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: