+1 to autoformatters and yapf. It appears to be a well maintained project. I do support making a one time pass to apply formatting the whole code base.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 5:38 PM Chad Dombrova <chad...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> It'd be good if there was a way to only apply to violating (or at >> least changed) lines. > > > I assumed the first thing we’d do is convert all of the code in one go, > since it’s a very safe operation. Did you have something else in mind? > > -chad > > > > > >> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 1:56 PM Chad Dombrova <chad...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > +1 to autoformatting >> > >> > Let me add some nuance to that. >> > >> > The way I see it there are 2 varieties of formatters: those which take >> the original formatting into consideration (autopep8) and those which >> disregard it (yapf, black). >> > >> > I much prefer yapf to black, because you have plenty of options to >> tweak with yapf (enough to make the output a pretty close match to the >> current Beam style), and you can mark areas to preserve the original >> formatting, which could be very useful with Pipeline building with pipe >> operators. Please don't pick black. >> > >> > autopep8 is more along the lines of spotless in Java -- it only >> corrects code that breaks the project's style rules. The big problem with >> Beam's current style is that it is so esoteric that autopep8 can't enforce >> it -- and I'm not just talking about 2-spaces, which I don't really have a >> problem with -- the problem is the use of either 2 or 4 spaces depending on >> context (expression start vs hanging indent, etc). This is my *biggest* >> gripe about the current style. PyCharm doesn't have enough control >> either. So, if we can choose a style that can be expressed by flake8 or >> pycodestyle then we can use autopep8 to enforce it. >> > >> > I'd prefer autopep8 to yapf because I like having a little wiggle room >> to influence the style, but on a big project like Beam all that wiggle room >> ends up to minor but noticeable inconsistencies in style throughout the >> project. yapf ensures completely consistent style, but the tradeoff is >> that it's sometimes ugly, especially in scenarios with similar repeated >> entries like argparse, where yapf might insert line breaks in visually >> inconsistent and unappealing ways depending on the lengths of the keywords >> and expressions involved. >> > >> > Either way (but especially if we choose yapf) I think it'd be a nice >> addition to setup a pre-commit [1] config so that people can opt in to >> running *lightweight* autofixers prior to commit. This will not only >> reduce dev frustration but will also reduce the amount of cpu cycles that >> Jenkins spends pointing out lint errors. >> > >> > [1] https://pre-commit.com/ >> > >> > -chad >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 12:52 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Last time we discussed this there seems not to be much progress into >> autoformatting. >> >> This tool looks more tweakable, so maybe it could be more appropriate >> for Beam's use case. >> >> https://github.com/google/yapf/ >> >> WDYT? >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:50 AM Łukasz Gajowy <lgaj...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> +1 for any autoformatter for Python SDK that does the job. My >> experience is that since spotless in Java SDK I would never start a new >> Java project without it. So many great benefits not only for one person >> coding but for all community. >> >>> >> >>> It is a GitHub UI issue that you cannot easily browse past the >> reformat. It is not actually that hard, but does take a couple extra clicks >> to get GitHub to display blame before a reformat. It is easier with the >> command line. I do a lot of code history digging and the global Java >> reformat is not really a problem. >> >>> >> >>> It's actually one more click on Github but I agree it's not the best >> way to search the history. The most convenient and clear one I've found so >> far is in Jetbrains IDEs (Intelij) where you can: >> >>> >> >>> right click on line number -> "annotate" -> click again -> "annotate >> previous revision" -> ... >> >>> >> >>> You can also use "compare with" to see the diff between two revisions. >> >>> >> >>> Łukasz >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> czw., 30 maj 2019 o 06:15 Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> >> napisał(a): >> >>>> >> >>>> +1 pending good enough tooling (I can't quite tell - seems there are >> some issues?) >> >>>> >> >>>> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 2:40 PM Katarzyna Kucharczyk < >> ka.kucharc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> What else actually we gain? My guess is faster PR review iteration. >> We will skip some of conversations about code style. >> >>>> >> >>>> ... >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Last but not least, new contributor may be less discouraged. When I >> started contribute I didn’t know how to format my code and I lost a lot of >> time to add pylint and adjust IntelliJ. I eventually failed. Currently I >> write code intuitively and when I don’t forget I rerun tox. >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> This is a huge benefit. This is why I supported it so much for Java. >> It is a community benefit. You do not have to be a contributor to the >> Python SDK to support this. That is why I am writing here. Just eliminate >> all discussion of formatting. It doesn't really matter what the resulting >> format is, if it is not crazy to read. I strongly oppose maintaining a >> non-default format. >> >>>> >> >>>> Reformating 20k lines or 200k is not hard. The Java global reformat >> touched 50k lines. It does not really matter how big it is. Definitely do >> it all at once if you think the tool is good enough. And you should pin a >> version, so churn is not a problem. You can upgrade the version and >> reformat in a PR later and that is also easy. >> >>>> >> >>>> It is a GitHub UI issue that you cannot easily browse past the >> reformat. It is not actually that hard, but does take a couple extra clicks >> to get GitHub to display blame before a reformat. It is easier with the >> command line. I do a lot of code history digging and the global Java >> reformat is not really a problem. >> >>>> >> >>>> Kenn >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Also everything will be formatted in a same way, so eventually it >> would be easier to read. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Moreover, as it was mentioned in previous emails - a lot of Jenkins >> failures won’t take place, so we save time and resources. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> One of disadvantages is that our pipelines has custom syntax and >> after formatting they looks a little bit weird, but maybe extending the >> only configurable option in Black - lines, from 88 to 110 would be solution. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Second one is that Black requires Python 3 to be run. I don’t know >> how big obstacle it would be. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> I believe there are two options how it would be possible to >> introduce Black. First: just do it, it will hurt but then it would be ok >> (same as a dentist appointment). Of course it may require some work to >> adjust linters. On the other hand we can do it gradually and start >> including sdk parts one by one - maybe it will be less painful? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> As an example I can share one of projects [2] I know that uses >> Black (they use also other cool checkers and pre-commit [3]). This is how >> looks their build with all checks [4]. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> To sum up I believe that if we want improve our coding experience, >> we should improve our toolset. Black seems be recent and quite popular tool >> what makes think they won’t stop developing it. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> [1] >> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4112410/git-change-styling-whitespace-without-changing-ownership-blame >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> [2] https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/oozie-to-airflow >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> [3] https://pre-commit.com >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> [4] >> https://travis-ci.org/GoogleCloudPlatform/oozie-to-airflow/builds/538725689 >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 2:01 PM Robert Bradshaw < >> rober...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Reformatting to 4 spaces seems a non-starter to me, as it would >> change nearly every single line in the codebase (and the loss of all >> context as well as that particular line). >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> This is probably why the 2-space fork exists. However, we don't >> conform to that either--we use 2 spaces for indentation, but 4 for >> continuation indentation. (As for the history of this, this goes back to >> Google's internal style guide, probably motivated by consistency with C++, >> Java, ... and the fact that with an indent level of 4 one ends up wrapping >> lines quite frequently (it's telling that black's default line length is >> 88)). This turns out to be an easy change to the codebase. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Once we move beyond the 2 vs. 4 whitespace thing, I found that >> this tool introduces a huge amount of vertical whitespace (e.g. closing >> parentheses on their own line), e.g. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> def foo( >> >>>>>> args >> >>>>>> ): >> >>>>>> if ( >> >>>>>> long expression) >> >>>>>> ): >> >>>>>> func( >> >>>>>> args >> >>>>>> ) >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> I wrote a simple post-processor to put closing parentheses on the >> same lines, as well as omit the newline after "if (", and disabling >> formatting of strings, which reduce the churn in our codebase to 15k lines >> (adding about 4k) out of 200k total. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8712/files >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> It's still very opinionated, often in different ways then me, and >> doesn't understand the semantics of the code, but possibly something we >> could live with given the huge advantages of an autoformatter. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> An intermediate point would be to allow, but not require, >> autoformatting of changed lines. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> As for being beta quality, it looks like it's got a decent number >> of contributors and in my book being in the python github project is a >> strong positive signal. But, due to the above issues, I think we'd have to >> maintain a fork. (The code is pretty lightweight, the 2 vs. 4 space issue >> is a 2-line change, and the rest implemented as a post-processing step (for >> now, incomplete), so it'd be easy to stay in sync with upstream.) >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 11:03 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > > I think the question is if it can be configured in a way to >> fit our >> >>>>>> > > current linter's style. I don't think it is feasible to >> reformat the >> >>>>>> > > entire Python SDK. >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > It cannot be configured to do what we actually do because Black >> is >> >>>>>> > configurable only to support the standard python codestyle >> guidelines >> >>>>>> > (PEP-8) which recommends 4 spaces and is what most projects in >> the >> >>>>>> > python world use. >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > > Reformatted lines don't allow quick access to the Git history. >> This >> >>>>>> > > effect is still visible in the Java SDK. However, I have the >> feeling >> >>>>>> > > that this might be less of a problem with Python because the >> linter has >> >>>>>> > > more rules than Checkstyle had. >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > Yes that’s the bad side effect but there are always tradeoffs we >> have >> >>>>>> > to deal with. >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 10:52 AM Maximilian Michels < >> m...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> > > I think the question is if it can be configured in a way to >> fit our >> >>>>>> > > current linter's style. I don't think it is feasible to >> reformat the >> >>>>>> > > entire Python SDK. >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> > > Reformatted lines don't allow quick access to the Git history. >> This >> >>>>>> > > effect is still visible in the Java SDK. However, I have the >> feeling >> >>>>>> > > that this might be less of a problem with Python because the >> linter has >> >>>>>> > > more rules than Checkstyle had. >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> > > -Max >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> > > On 29.05.19 10:16, Ismaël Mejía wrote: >> >>>>>> > > >> My concerns are: >> >>>>>> > > >> - The product is clearly marked as beta with a big warning. >> >>>>>> > > >> - It looks like mostly a single person project. For the >> same reason I also strongly prefer not using a fork for a specific setting. >> Fork will only have less people looking at it. >> >>>>>> > > > >> >>>>>> > > > I suppose the project is marked as beta because it is >> recent, it was >> >>>>>> > > > presented in 2018’s pycon, and because some things can >> change since >> >>>>>> > > > auto-formatters are pretty tricky beasts, I think beta in >> that case is >> >>>>>> > > > like our own ‘@Experimental’. If you look at the >> contribution page [1] >> >>>>>> > > > you can notice that it is less and less a single person >> project, there >> >>>>>> > > > have been 93 independent contributions since the project >> became >> >>>>>> > > > public, and the fact that it is hosted in the python >> organization >> >>>>>> > > > github [2] gives some confidence on the project continuity. >> >>>>>> > > > >> >>>>>> > > > You are right however about the fact that the main author >> seems to be >> >>>>>> > > > the ‘benevolent’ dictator, and in the 2-spaces issue he can >> seem >> >>>>>> > > > arbitrary, but he is just following pep8 style guide >> recommendations >> >>>>>> > > > [3]. I am curious of why we (Beam) do not follow the 4 spaces >> >>>>>> > > > recommendation of PEP-8 or even Google's own Python style >> guide [4], >> >>>>>> > > > So, probably it should be to us to reconsider the current >> policy to >> >>>>>> > > > adapt to the standards (and the tool). >> >>>>>> > > > >> >>>>>> > > > I did a quick run of black with python 2.7 compatibility on >> >>>>>> > > > sdks/python and got only 4 parsing errors which is positive >> given the >> >>>>>> > > > size of our code base. >> >>>>>> > > > >> >>>>>> > > > 415 files reformatted, 45 files left unchanged, 4 files >> failed to reformat. >> >>>>>> > > > >> >>>>>> > > > error: cannot format >> >>>>>> > > > >> /home/ismael/upstream/beam/sdks/python/apache_beam/runners/interactive/display/display_manager.py: >> >>>>>> > > > Cannot parse: 47:22: _display_progress = print >> >>>>>> > > > error: cannot format >> >>>>>> > > > >> /home/ismael/upstream/beam/sdks/python/apache_beam/runners/worker/log_handler.py: >> >>>>>> > > > Cannot parse: 151:18: file=sys.stderr) >> >>>>>> > > > error: cannot format >> >>>>>> > > > >> /home/ismael/upstream/beam/sdks/python/apache_beam/runners/worker/sdk_worker.py: >> >>>>>> > > > Cannot parse: 160:34: print(traceback_string, >> file=sys.stderr) >> >>>>>> > > > error: cannot format >> >>>>>> > > > >> /home/ismael/upstream/beam/sdks/python/apache_beam/typehints/trivial_inference.py: >> >>>>>> > > > Cannot parse: 335:51: print('-->' if pc == last_pc >> else ' ', >> >>>>>> > > > end=' ') >> >>>>>> > > > >> >>>>>> > > > I still think this can be positive for the project but well >> I am >> >>>>>> > > > barely a contributor to the python code base so I let you >> the python >> >>>>>> > > > maintainers to reconsider this, in any case it seems like a >> good >> >>>>>> > > > improvement for the project. >> >>>>>> > > > >> >>>>>> > > > [1] https://github.com/python/black/graphs/contributors >> >>>>>> > > > [2] https://github.com/python >> >>>>>> > > > [3] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#indentation >> >>>>>> > > > [4] >> https://github.com/google/styleguide/blob/gh-pages/pyguide.md#34-indentation >> >>>>>> > > > >> >>>>>> > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:15 PM Ahmet Altay < >> al...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> > > >> >> >>>>>> > > >> I am in the same boat with Robert, I am in favor of >> autoformatters but I am not familiar with this one. My concerns are: >> >>>>>> > > >> - The product is clearly marked as beta with a big warning. >> >>>>>> > > >> - It looks like mostly a single person project. For the >> same reason I also strongly prefer not using a fork for a specific setting. >> Fork will only have less people looking at it. >> >>>>>> > > >> >> >>>>>> > > >> IMO, this is in an early stage for us. That said lint >> issues are real as pointed in the thread. If someone would like to give it >> a try and see how it would look like for us that would be interesting. >> >>>>>> > > >> >> >>>>>> > > >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 4:44 AM Katarzyna Kucharczyk < >> ka.kucharc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> > > >>> >> >>>>>> > > >>> This sounds really good. A lot of Jenkins jobs failures >> are caused by lint problems. >> >>>>>> > > >>> I think it would be great to have something similar to >> Spotless in Java SDK (I heard there is problem with configuring Black with >> IntelliJ). >> >>>>>> > > >>> >> >>>>>> > > >>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 10:52 PM Robert Bradshaw < >> rober...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> > > >>>> >> >>>>>> > > >>>> I'm generally in favor of autoformatters, though I >> haven't looked at >> >>>>>> > > >>>> how well this particular one works. We might have to go >> with >> >>>>>> > > >>>> https://github.com/desbma/black-2spaces given >> >>>>>> > > >>>> https://github.com/python/black/issues/378 . >> >>>>>> > > >>>> >> >>>>>> > > >>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 10:43 PM Pablo Estrada < >> pabl...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> > > >>>>> >> >>>>>> > > >>>>> This looks pretty good:) I know at least a couple people >> (myself included) who've been annoyed by having to take care of lint issues >> that maybe a code formatter could save us. >> >>>>>> > > >>>>> Thanks for sharing Ismael. >> >>>>>> > > >>>>> -P. >> >>>>>> > > >>>>> >> >>>>>> > > >>>>> >> >>>>>> > > >>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019, 12:24 PM Ismaël Mejía < >> ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I stumbled by chance into Black [1] a python code auto >> formatter that >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> is becoming the 'de-facto' auto-formatter for python, >> and wanted to >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> bring to the ML Is there interest from the python >> people to get this >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> into the build? >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> The introduction of spotless for Java has been a good >> improvement and >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> maybe the python code base may benefit of this too. >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> WDYT? >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> [1] https://github.com/python/black >> >
