False positive for N805 in a child class about pep8-naming

[sigmavirus24]

pylint does significantly more to analyze code that isn't strictly available to us. Presuming the exact case you've provided, we might be able to detect this, but if Foo were in another module, it wouldn't actually work. We have some notion of tracking parent classes already so we might be able to catch this but it's also rare enough that I feel people would be better served by adding # noqa: N805 to the line

[skirpichev]

Hmm, then maybe this check is not a suitable task for the pep8-naming?

[sigmavirus24]

Hmm, then maybe this check is not a suitable task for the pep8-naming?

Checking for self? Which is right 99.99% of the time? No. It's perfectly suitable.