[yt-dev] Repo cleanup

[John ZuHone]

Hi Nathan,

+1 on all of these. I admit that I wish we could get two-point functions working, but I also don't have any time to dedicate towards it myself.

John

John ZuHone
Kavli Center for Astrophysics and Space Research
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
77 Massachusetts Ave., 37-582G
Cambridge, MA 02139
(w) 617-253-2354
(m) 781-708-5004
jzuhone at space.mit.edu
jzuhone at gmail.com
http://www.jzuhone.com

> On Aug 9, 2015, at 7:35 PM, Nathan Goldbaum <nathan12343 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I'd like to spend some time in the next week or two doing some cleanup and tidying up on the yt repo.  This comes in two flavors: removing dead code and adding basic linting tests.
> 
> Dead Code
> ---------------
> 
> There are still a number of big chunks of legacy code in the codebase that aren't called by anything, including:
> 
> * boolean data objects
> * reason / reason plot widgets (yt.gui)
> * two scripts in the top-level "scripts" directory (pyro_queue.py and yt_lodgeit.py)
> * the top-level "tests" directory
> * possibly some of the analysis modules? (star_analysis and two_point_functions)
> 
> I'm curious what others think about removing some or all of this code. I'd particularly like to hear if I'm wrong about the code in the list above or if I've missed any chunks of unused code.
> 
> I do understand the desire to keep the code in the repository in the hopes that one day someone might make it functional, but I think this consideration is balanced by how confusing it can be to come across dead code and then get frustrated after finding weird incompatibilities.
> 
> Basic Linting Tests
> -------------------------
> 
> I'd like to catch as many errors as possible by doing basic static analysis of the yt codebase using pyflakes and flake8.  We already have coverage with both tools run as part of the test suite, but introducing errors detected by these tools does not fail the build. I'd like to add a few of the errors caught by these tools to the test suite itself, making the tools optional dependencies for the tests. Hopefully these new tests will be useful and not obnoxious: I'm not talking about enforcing pep8 as part of the test suite.
> 
> To do this, I think the biggest change necessary is to get rid of all instances of "import *" throughout the codebase. This will allow us to test for unused imports (probably shouldn't fail the build) or missing imports (definitely should fail the build).
> 
> Again, I'd appreciate any comments or objections to this general approach.
> 
> Thanks for your attention! Sorry for the long e-mail...
> 
> -Nathan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> yt-dev mailing list
> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spacepope.org/pipermail/yt-dev-spacepope.org/attachments/20150809/06186814/attachment.html>