On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:45:25 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Mar 8, 7:34 pm, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > cybersource.com.au> wrote: >> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 19:31:47 +0000, Grant Edwards wrote: >> > I'm also a bit baffled by people who put a comment at the top of >> > every file that tells you what the filename is. >> >> [snip rant] >> >> You've never printed out a source file on pieces of dead tree to read >> on the train on the way home, or in bed or the bath? >> >> Yes, some editors will print a header or footer showing the file name, >> but not all will, or are configured to do so. > > The only times I can recall printing source were in college classes > where I was required to hand in a hardcopy with the assignment and code > samples for job interviews. In the real world the code base tends to be > too huge to contemplate printing...
You've never (say) printed out the source code to one of the modules in the Python standard library to read and study? If your code base is so huge that you can't print out any meaningful piece, then you desperately need more encapsulation. > Even in the early 1990s the moral equivalent of enscript (I think it was > a2ps) worked just fine for printing with filenames, line/page numbers, > and other niceties no matter what editor you used. It seems more > reasonable to mandate using a sane print tool for the odd case where > someone wants to print things out than to mandate cluttering up every > file with the filename in a comment. Sure, but really, adding ONE LINE to the start of a file is hardly "cluttering up" anything. Especially if it is in the doc string, like this: """widgets.py: create, manage and destroy widgets. blah blah blah blah...""" -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
