Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote:
> I'm afraid laptop monitors aren't enlarged so easily, and I find myself on a
> laptop most of the time these days.
Eyephones. Virtual 360-degree wraparound displays.
Greg
___
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
On Saturday 25 March 2006 08:36, Kevin Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Take the "glass half full" approach -- just think how big a monitor you'll
> get to see all that information on the screen!
I'm afraid laptop monitors aren't enlarged so easily, and I find myself on a
laptop most of the
On 25/03/06 Guido van Rossum said:
> Actually, a 120-wide window is mostly a bigger waste of space since
> *most* code easily fits in 80 columns (remember, average line length
> is 30!). Folding the occasional long line is much better use of
> resources than stretching the window to accommodate it
On 3/25/06, Kevin Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/24/06, Fred L. Drake, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Friday 24 March 2006 11:49, Kevin Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > Don't forget those of us who are now pushing for 120 character wide
> > > source fil
On 3/24/06, Fred L. Drake, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 24 March 2006 11:49, Kevin Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Don't forget those of us who are now pushing for 120 character wide source > files!
That would be bad. Do you realize just how small fonts would have to get tolet us s
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Please tell me this whole thread is a cruel joke.
I know it isn't going to happen for Python, but
I seriously believe that all-tabs is a better
technical approach to program indentation, for
a variety of reasons. The only arguments against
it that I can see are legacy-re
Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote:
> That would be bad. Do you realize just how small fonts would have to get to
> let us still have as many editor windows on-screen?
I'm still waiting for desk-sized displays with
stylus for input. Let's make the desktop metaphor
more than a metaphor!
Greg
On 3/23/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If we standardised on all-tabs, people could set their
> editors to display indentation however they wanted, and
> there would be no need to argue about how many spaces
> should be dancing at the head of a code line.
[and much followup]
Please t
On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 12:11 -0500, Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote:
> On Friday 24 March 2006 11:49, Kevin Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Don't forget those of us who are now pushing for 120 character wide source
> > files!
>
> That would be bad. Do you realize just how small fonts would have t
On Friday 24 March 2006 11:49, Kevin Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Don't forget those of us who are now pushing for 120 character wide source
> files!
That would be bad. Do you realize just how small fonts would have to get to
let us still have as many editor windows on-screen? I don't
On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 11:49 -0500, Kevin Jacobs wrote:
> On 3/24/06, Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> like 8-space indents would then start to argue vociferously
> about how many
> levels of indentation are acceptable given an
> 80-character-wide source
On 3/24/06, Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
like 8-space indents would then start to argue vociferously about how manylevels of indentation are acceptable given an 80-character-wide source file.Don't forget those of us who are now pushing for 120 character wide source files!
-Kevin
_
Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > That won't go away for me (Google's settings default to TWO-space indents
> > :-( ) but I agree with the 4-space indent -- eventually.
>
> If we standardised on all-tabs, people could set their editors to display
> indentation
On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 19:41 +1200, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > That won't go away for me (Google's settings default to TWO-space
> > indents :-( ) but I agree with the 4-space indent -- eventually.
>
> If we standardised on all-tabs, people could set their
> editors to displ
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> That won't go away for me (Google's settings default to TWO-space
> indents :-( ) but I agree with the 4-space indent -- eventually.
If we standardised on all-tabs, people could set their
editors to display indentation however they wanted, and
there would be no need to a
[Brett Cannon]
|>> Yes, please! I think for the Py3K codebase we should at least require
>> code meet the style guide. We are all guilty of having ignored it at
>> some point,
I'm not :-)
> ...
[Nick Coghlan]
> I would love it if PEP 3007 standardised on 4-space indents, the same as the
> stan
On 3/22/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would love it if PEP 3007 standardised on 4-space indents, the same as the
> standard for Python code in the standard lib. I'd love it even more if
> reindent.py cleaned up C whitespace as well as Python whitespace. These days,
> getting any C
On 3/22/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I would love it if PEP 3007 standardised on 4-space indents, the same as the
> standard for Python code in the standard lib. I'd love it even more if
> reindent.py cleaned up C whitespace as well as Python whitespace.
Wait! I thought we were
Brett Cannon wrote:
> On 3/22/06, Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [SNIP]
>> Speaking of PEP-3007, any ideas on how different from PEP-0007 it'll be?
>> tabs or four-space indents? How rigourously will it be applied? (I honestly
>> don't have any problems with PEP-0007 except for its int
19 matches
Mail list logo
