Skip to content
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

some flake8 details in backend normaliz #30878

Closed
fchapoton opened this issue Nov 9, 2020 · 8 comments
Closed

some flake8 details in backend normaliz #30878

fchapoton opened this issue Nov 9, 2020 · 8 comments

Comments

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

and also fix two lgtm warnings

nothing serious, mostly cosmetic changes

CC: @jplab @LaisRast @kliem @sophiasage

Component: geometry

Author: Frédéric Chapoton

Branch/Commit: 310903a

Reviewer: Jonathan Kliem

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/30878

@fchapoton fchapoton added this to the sage-9.3 milestone Nov 9, 2020
@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor Author

Branch: u/chapoton/30878

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Nov 9, 2020

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

310903asome details in backend pynormaliz

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Nov 9, 2020

Commit: 310903a

@fchapoton fchapoton changed the title some flake8 details in backend pynormaliz some flake8 details in backend normaliz Nov 9, 2020
@kliem
Copy link
Contributor

kliem commented Nov 9, 2020

comment:4

This seems inconsistent to me:

-            h_vertices = [ list(v) + [1] for v in vertices ]
+            h_vertices = [list(v) + [1] for v in vertices]
-                dieq = [ ZZ(d*ieq_i) for ieq_i in ieq ]
+                dieq = [ ZZ(d * ieq_i) for ieq_i in ieq ]

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor Author

comment:5

well, I was tempted to remove (as suggested by flake8) all superfluous whitespace before or after brackets. But then I decide to try to keep the diff small, so I did that only once.

@kliem
Copy link
Contributor

kliem commented Nov 9, 2020

comment:6

I think for i,j in enumerate... is better to read than for i, j in enumerate,
but this might also be because I'm used to it and it seems to be against pep8.

@kliem
Copy link
Contributor

kliem commented Nov 9, 2020

Reviewer: Jonathan Kliem

@vbraun
Copy link
Member

vbraun commented Nov 22, 2020

Changed branch from u/chapoton/30878 to 310903a

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants