From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtpng3.m.smailru.net (smtpng3.m.smailru.net [94.100.177.149]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B9A4469710 for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 21:21:32 +0300 (MSK) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 21:13:05 +0300 From: Igor Munkin Message-ID: <20200601181305.GV21558@tarantool.org> References: <5bd340ed-f75f-42b5-d0e3-2b6870285add@tarantool.org> <20200601172904.epficmoznfmifubz@tkn_work_nb> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200601172904.epficmoznfmifubz@tkn_work_nb> Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v6 00/25] Add static analysis with luacheck List-Id: Tarantool development patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alexander Turenko Cc: o.piskunov@tarantool.org, tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org, Vladislav Shpilevoy Sasha, On 01.06.20, Alexander Turenko wrote: > On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 07:08:09PM +0200, Vladislav Shpilevoy wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Sorry, looks like this version also is not the final. Alexander T. > > joined the review, and Igor still has comments. So I am going to > > skip this one, and review the next version. > > I just noted my objections against enabling redefinition warning by > default. I asked this two times in March, but it was in a chat and it > seems it was missed. > > Also noted objection against removing unused arguments, when they show a > function contract. > > Nothing more. It is not full review and I hope I will not asked to do > it. Nevertheless, your comments might lead to a major change in the whole patchset and are valuable since strictly saying we still don't have definition of done criteria for this issue. > > WBR, Alexander Turenko. -- Best regards, IM