Thank you Robert. https://github.com/google/yapf/issues/530 has been open for 2 years, but we will use `yapf: disable` and `yapf: enable` as a workaround for now.
David On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 12:29 PM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> wrote: > Yeah, that's a lot worse. This looks like > https://github.com/google/yapf/issues/530 . In the meantime, > https://pypi.org/project/yapf/#potentially-frequently-asked-questions > > On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 12:17 PM David Yan <david...@google.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, I just tried out the yapf formatter and I noticed that sometimes > it's making the original code a lot less readable. > > In the below example, - is the original, + is after running the yapf > formatter. Looks like the problem is with the method chaining pattern. > > How feasible is it to have yapf identify such a pattern and format it > better? > > Before this can be fixed, Is it possible to have a directive in the code > comment to bypass yapf? > > > > Thanks! > > > > - test_stream = (TestStream() > > - .advance_watermark_to(0) > > - .add_elements(['a', 'b', 'c']) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_watermark_to(5) > > - .add_elements(['1', '2', '3']) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_watermark_to(6) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_watermark_to(7) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_watermark_to(8) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_watermark_to(9) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_watermark_to(10) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_watermark_to(11) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_watermark_to(12) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_watermark_to(13) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_watermark_to(14) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - .advance_watermark_to(15) > > - .advance_processing_time(1) > > - ) > > + test_stream = ( > > + TestStream().advance_watermark_to(0).add_elements( > > + ['a', 'b', > 'c']).advance_processing_time(1).advance_processing_time( > > + > 1).advance_processing_time(1).advance_processing_time(1). > > + advance_processing_time(1).advance_watermark_to(5).add_elements( > > + ['1', '2', > '3']).advance_processing_time(1).advance_watermark_to( > > + 6).advance_processing_time(1).advance_watermark_to( > > + 7).advance_processing_time(1).advance_watermark_to( > > + > 8).advance_processing_time(1).advance_watermark_to(9). > > + advance_processing_time(1).advance_watermark_to( > > + 10).advance_processing_time(1).advance_watermark_to( > > + 11).advance_processing_time(1).advance_watermark_to( > > + 12).advance_processing_time(1).advance_watermark_to( > > + > 13).advance_processing_time(1).advance_watermark_to( > > + > 14).advance_processing_time(1).advance_watermark_to( > > + 15).advance_processing_time(1)) > > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:50 PM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:29 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Thanks Kamil and Michał for taking care of this. > >>> Excellent job! > >>> > >>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:45 PM Kamil Wasilewski < > kamil.wasilew...@polidea.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Thanks to everyone involved in the discussion. > >>>> > >>>> I've taken a look at the first 50 recently updated Pull Requests. > Only few of them were affected. I hope it wouldn't be too hard to fix them. > >>>> > >>>> In any case, here you can find instructions on how to run formatter: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BEAM/Python+Tips (section > "Formatting"). > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 12:42 PM Michał Walenia < > michal.wale...@polidea.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi, > >>>>> the PR is merged, all checks were green :) > >>>>> Enjoy prettier Python! > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 11:11 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Agree no need for vote for this because the consensus is clear and > the sole > >>>>>> impact I can think of are pending PRs that will be broken. In the > Java case > >>>>>> what we did was to just notice every PR that was affected by the > change. > >>>>>> And clearly document how to validate and autoformat the code. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> So the earlier the better, go go autoformat! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:38 AM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> > wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> No, perhaps not. I agree there's consensus, just wondering what the > >>>>>>> next steps should be to get this in. (The presubmits look like > they're > >>>>>>> all passing, with the exception of some breakage in java that > should > >>>>>>> be completely unrelated. Of course there's already merge > conflicts...) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 3:55 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> > wrote: > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > Do we need a formal vote? There is consensus on this thread and > on the PR. > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 3:37 PM Robert Bradshaw < > rober...@google.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> The PR is looking good. Should we call a vote? > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 11:03 AM Robert Bradshaw < > rober...@google.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> >> > Thanks. I commented on the PR. I think if we're going this > route we > >>>>>>> >> > should add a pre-commit, plus instructions on how to run the > tool > >>>>>>> >> > (similar to spotless). > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> >> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:00 AM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com> > wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>> >> > > I've done a pass on the PR on code I'm familiar with. > >>>>>>> >> > > Please make a pass and add your suggestions on the PR. > >>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>> >> > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 7:15 AM Ismaël Mejía < > ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >> > >>>>>>> >> > >> Java build fails on any unformatted code so python > probably should be like that. > >>>>>>> >> > >> We have to ensure however that it fails early on that. > >>>>>>> >> > >> As Robert said time to debate the knobs :) > >>>>>>> >> > >> > >>>>>>> >> > >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 3:19 PM Kamil Wasilewski < > kamil.wasilew...@polidea.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>> PR is ready: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/10684. > Please share your comments ;-) I've managed to reduce the impact a bit: > >>>>>>> >> > >>> 501 files changed, 18245 insertions(+), 19495 deletions(-) > >>>>>>> >> > >>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>> We still need to consider how to enforce the usage of > autoformatter. Pre-commit sounds like a nice addition, but it still needs > to be installed manually by a developer. On the other hand, Jenkins > precommit job that fails if any unformatted code is detected looks like too > strict. What do you think? > >>>>>>> >> > >>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 8:37 PM Robert Bradshaw < > rober...@google.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> Thanks! Now we get to debate what knobs to twiddle :-P > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> FYI, I did a simple run (just pushed to > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > https://github.com/apache/beam/compare/master...robertwb:yapf) to see > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> the impact. The diff is > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> $ git diff --stat master > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> ... > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> 547 files changed, 22118 insertions(+), 21129 > deletions(-) > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> For reference > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> $ find sdks/python/apache_beam -name '*.py' | xargs > wc > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> ... > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> 200424 612002 7431637 total > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> which means a little over 10% of lines get touched. I > think there are > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> some options, such as > SPLIT_ALL_TOP_LEVEL_COMMA_SEPARATED_VALUES and > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> COALESCE_BRACKETS, that will conform more to the style > we are already > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> (mostly) following. > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 1:59 AM Kamil Wasilewski > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> <kamil.wasilew...@polidea.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > Thank you Michał for creating the ticket. I have some > free time and I'd like to volunteer myself for this task. > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > Indeed, it looks like there's consensus for `yapf`, so > I'll try `yapf` first. > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > Best, > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > Kamil > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 10:37 AM Michał Walenia < > michal.wale...@polidea.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> Hi all, > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> I created a JIRA issue for this and summarized the > available tools > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-9175 > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> Cheers, > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> Michal > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 1:49 AM Udi Meiri < > eh...@google.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>> Sorry, backing off on this due to time constraints. > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 3:39 PM Udi Meiri < > eh...@google.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>> It sounds like there's a consensus for yapf. I > volunteer to take this on > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020, 10:31 Udi Meiri < > eh...@google.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>>> +1 to autoformatting > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:57 AM Luke Cwik < > lc...@google.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>>>> +1 to autoformatters. Also the Beam Java SDK went > through a one time pass to apply the spotless formatting. > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:52 PM Ahmet Altay < > al...@google.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >>>>>>> +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 > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> -- > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> Michał Walenia > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> Polidea | Software Engineer > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> M: +48 791 432 002 <+48%20791%20432%20002> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> E: michal.wale...@polidea.com > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> Unique Tech > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> >> Check out our projects! > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> > >>>>> Michał Walenia > >>>>> Polidea | Software Engineer > >>>>> > >>>>> M: +48 791 432 002 <+48%20791%20432%20002> > >>>>> E: michal.wale...@polidea.com > >>>>> > >>>>> Unique Tech > >>>>> Check out our projects! > >
