Raymond Hettinger added the comment:
I concur with the other commenters and am marking this as closed.
Thank you for the effort to contribute. May I suggest working on one the many
open bug reports.
--
nosy: +rhettinger
resolution: -> rejected
stage: patch review -> resolved
status:
Berker Peksag added the comment:
I don't think most of the changes improve readability of json.tool. Everyone
has their own preferences and it's usually not enough to justify code churn.
Also, we don't need to add comments when the code itself is pretty descriptive:
# Output JSON
with
R. David Murray added the comment:
However, our general policy is that we don't make such changes unless we are
also touching the code for other reasons. So I think using this PR as a base
for your feature PRs, and then committing everything together if they are
accepted, would be the way to
New submission from Daniel Himmelstein:
In https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/2720, I propose code changes to the
json.tool command line utility. These changes are entirely non-functional and
instead focus on improving code readability, style, brevity, extensibility, and
maintainability.
