research: is it useful to test with more typecheckers and linters
Closed this issue · 0 comments
Based on the list on https://github.com/typeddjango/awesome-python-typing?tab=readme-ov-file#static-type-checkers
Which static typecheckers make sense to invest time on ?
- basedmypy - Based static typing with baseline functionality.
🤔possibly interesting by replaces mypy - which is not desired
- mypy - Optional static typing (PEP 484).
✅Part of test suite
- pyanalyze - Extensible static analyzer and type checker.
🚫requires being able to import the .py files , which does not work for MicroPython Code
- pycharm - IDE for Professional Developers.
🐢 Does work in manual testing - but cannot be tested in isolation
- pylyzer - A fast static code analyzer & language server for Python, written in Rust.
🚫 Currently does not support running against a set of files
- pyre - Performant type-checker.
🤔no Windows option - could mainly test in CI
- pyright - Fast type checker meant for large Python source bases. It can run in a “watch” mode and performs fast incremental updates when files are modified.
✅Part of test suite
- pytype - Tool to check and infer types - without requiring type annotations.
🎲No direct windows option - but possibly can be built 'ERROR: Could not build wheels for pytype - error: Microsoft Visual C++ 14.0 or greater is required.'.
Not a simple issue to fix though : google/pytype#1154