Re: Continuing indentation

On Sat, 5 Mar 2016 08:14 am, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: > I wouldn't call PEP 8 "correct". I would say that you just simply agree > with PEP 8's suggestion. > > You guys are spending way too much time fighting over something that is > clearly subjective. Nobody is "correct" here. There's no

Re: Continuing indentation

srinivas devaki writes: > thought i should add this here so that people will get to this after > someone decides a standard way to do this :P No, you've wasted that effort. If you want a request to be acted on by those who maintain the official Python source, submit

Re: Continuing indentation

thought i should add this here so that people will get to this after someone decides a standard way to do this :P look for second if condition in the source code of subprocess.Popen(*args, **kwargs).communicate def communicate(self, input=None, timeout=None): """Interact with

Re: Continuing indentation

On 2016-03-04 17:17, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: > x \ > = \ > 5 > if \ > y \ > == \ > z: > print \ > 'this is terrible' > print \ > 'but still not incorrect > > It would be terrible, still but not incorrect. And has the sociopathic benefit that the diffs make it quite clear

Re: Continuing indentation

sohcahto...@gmail.com writes: > Arguing whether or not a style guide is "incorrect" is as silly as > arguing over whether lima beans are delicious. I think they're > disgusting, but you can't make a statement of fact about the topic. Yet there *are* many relevant facts that bear on the choice of

Re: Continuing indentation

On 03/04/2016 05:17 PM, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: I just can't understand why so many people get their panties all up in a bunch over how other people choose to format their code. s/panties/undies/g ;) -- ~Ethan~ -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Continuing indentation

Hi Ben, On 05/03/16 01:05, Ben Finney wrote: Certainly you are allowed. You should not expect that suggestion to be compelling unless it is accompanied by *factual*, rather than emotive, argument. I thought I had done that. I pointed out that LHS (whitespace) is significant when it comes to

Re: Continuing indentation

On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 4:43:57 PM UTC-8, Simon Ward wrote: > On 4 March 2016 23:31:43 GMT+00:00, Erik wrote: > >On 04/03/16 21:14, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: > >> You guys are spending way too much time fighting over something that > >is clearly subjective.

Re: Continuing indentation

Erik writes: > On 05/03/16 00:23, Simon Ward wrote: > > Style guides are always going to be considered incorrect by some > > people, but they should aim more for consistency (the hobgoblin that > > may be), which is what makes code easier to grok. > > So you're saying

Re: Continuing indentation

On 03/04/2016 04:30 PM, Ben Finney wrote:> sohcahto...@gmail.com writes: >> On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 3:41:29 PM UTC-8, Ben Finney wrote: >>> We can't put the binary operator in multiple places, >> >> >> >> Who are you, the binary operator police? Watch me! >> >> if x == y and \ >>

Re: Continuing indentation

On 05/03/16 00:23, Simon Ward wrote: Style guides are always going to be considered incorrect by some people, but they should aim more for consistency (the hobgoblin that may be), which is what makes code easier to grok. So you're saying that it doesn't matter if something is good or bad, as

Re: Continuing indentation

On 4 March 2016 23:31:43 GMT+00:00, Erik wrote: >On 04/03/16 21:14, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: >> You guys are spending way too much time fighting over something that >is clearly subjective. Nobody is "correct" here. There's no right and >wrong, just simple

Re: Continuing indentation

sohcahto...@gmail.com writes: > On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 3:41:29 PM UTC-8, Ben Finney wrote: > > We can't put the binary operator in multiple places, > > > > Who are you, the binary operator police? Watch me! > > if x == y and \ > x == z and \ > a > b \ > or b > c \ >

Re: Continuing indentation

On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 3:41:29 PM UTC-8, Ben Finney wrote: > alister writes: > > > On Fri, 04 Mar 2016 10:23:37 +0900, INADA Naoki wrote: > > > > > Because PEP8 says: > > > > > >> The preferred place to break around a binary operator is after the > > >> operator,

Re: Continuing indentation

On 03/04/2016 03:45 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote: > PEP8 is not a standard that must be adhered to under all > cicumstances, it is only a style guide [...] Not only that, it's a style guide for code /in the stdlib/. Make your own style guide for your own projects. ;) -- ~Ethan~ --

Re: Continuing indentation

On 04/03/2016 23:31, Erik wrote: On 04/03/16 21:14, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: You guys are spending way too much time fighting over something that is clearly subjective. Nobody is "correct" here. There's no right and wrong, just simple preference. I will take that as a vote +1 that PEP8

Re: Continuing indentation

alister writes: > On Fri, 04 Mar 2016 10:23:37 +0900, INADA Naoki wrote: > > > Because PEP8 says: > > > >> The preferred place to break around a binary operator is after the > >> operator, not before it. http://pep8.org/#maximum-line-length > > and that is to make it

Re: Continuing indentation

On 04/03/16 21:14, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: You guys are spending way too much time fighting over something that is clearly subjective. Nobody is "correct" here. There's no right and wrong, just simple preference. I will take that as a vote +1 that PEP8 is wrong (*). ;) E. (*) PEP8

Re: Continuing indentation

On 04/03/2016 21:14, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 6:03:48 AM UTC-8, alister wrote: On Fri, 04 Mar 2016 10:12:58 +, cl wrote: Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:23 pm, INADA Naoki wrote: Indeed. I don't understand why, when

Re: Continuing indentation

On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 6:03:48 AM UTC-8, alister wrote: > On Fri, 04 Mar 2016 10:12:58 +, cl wrote: > > > Steven D'Aprano wrote: > >> On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:23 pm, INADA Naoki wrote: > >> > >> > >> >> > >> >> Indeed. I don't understand why, when splitting a

Re: Continuing indentation

On 03/04/2016 07:25 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:03 AM, alister wrote: On Fri, 04 Mar 2016 10:12:58 +, cl wrote: Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:23 pm, INADA Naoki wrote: Indeed. I don't understand why,

Re: Continuing indentation

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:03 AM, alister wrote: > On Fri, 04 Mar 2016 10:12:58 +, cl wrote: > >> Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>> On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:23 pm, INADA Naoki wrote: >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> Indeed. I don't understand why, when splitting a

Re: Continuing indentation

On Fri, 04 Mar 2016 10:12:58 +, cl wrote: > Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:23 pm, INADA Naoki wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Indeed. I don't understand why, when splitting a condition such as >> >> this, >> >> people tend to put the operator at the end of

Re: Continuing indentation

On Fri, 04 Mar 2016 10:23:37 +0900, INADA Naoki wrote: >> >> Indeed. I don't understand why, when splitting a condition such as >> this, >> people tend to put the operator at the end of each line. >> >> > Because PEP8 says: > >> The preferred place to break around a binary operator is after the

Re: Continuing indentation

Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:23 pm, INADA Naoki wrote: > > >> > >> > >> Indeed. I don't understand why, when splitting a condition such as this, > >> people tend to put the operator at the end of each line. > >> > >> > > Because PEP8 says: > > > >> The

Re: Continuing indentation

Steven D'Aprano : > class C: > def method(self): > if (result is None > or self.some_condition() > or len(some_sequence) > 100 > or some_other_condition > or page_count < 5 > ): >

Re: Continuing indentation

On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:23 pm, INADA Naoki wrote: >> >> >> Indeed. I don't understand why, when splitting a condition such as this, >> people tend to put the operator at the end of each line. >> >> > Because PEP8 says: > >> The preferred place to break around a binary operator is after the >

Re: Continuing indentation

On 04/03/16 01:23, INADA Naoki wrote: Indeed. I don't understand why, when splitting a condition such as this, people tend to put the operator at the end of each line. Because PEP8 says: The preferred place to break around a binary operator is after the operator, not before it. I mean in

Re: Continuing indentation

> > > Indeed. I don't understand why, when splitting a condition such as this, > people tend to put the operator at the end of each line. > > Because PEP8 says: > The preferred place to break around a binary operator is after the operator, not before it. http://pep8.org/#maximum-line-length --

Re: Continuing indentation

On 04/03/16 00:13, Steven D'Aprano wrote: class C: def method(self): if (result is None or self.some_condition() or len(some_sequence) > 100 or some_other_condition or page_count < 5 ):

Re: Continuing indentation

> > > class C: > def method(self): > if (result is None > or self.some_condition() > or len(some_sequence) > 100 > or some_other_condition > or page_count < 5 > ): > do_processing() > > > Looks fine

Re: Continuing indentation

On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 03:47 am, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > John Gordon : > >> In <871t7sbkex@elektro.pacujo.net> Marko Rauhamaa >> writes: >> >>> Ethan Furman : >> >>> > No, it isn't. Using '\' for line continuation is strongly >>> >

Re: Continuing indentation

Rob Gaddi : > Not ugly, error-prone. The first is purely aestehetic, the second > actually matters. Let something as simple as a trailing space sneak in > after your backslash and your meaning changes. Blank line between; > same thing. Never been bitten by

Re: Continuing indentation

Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > John Gordon : > >> In <871t7sbkex@elektro.pacujo.net> Marko Rauhamaa >> writes: >> >>> Ethan Furman : >> >>> > No, it isn't. Using '\' for line continuation is strongly discouraged. >> >>> Why would you

Re: Continuing indentation

John Gordon : > In <871t7sbkex@elektro.pacujo.net> Marko Rauhamaa > writes: > >> Ethan Furman : > >> > No, it isn't. Using '\' for line continuation is strongly discouraged. > >> Why would you discourage valid syntax? > > Some things

Re: Continuing indentation

In <871t7sbkex@elektro.pacujo.net> Marko Rauhamaa writes: > Ethan Furman : > > No, it isn't. Using '\' for line continuation is strongly discouraged. > Why would you discourage valid syntax? Some things that are permissible may not be desirable. --

Re: Continuing indentation

codewiz...@gmail.com wrote: > On Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 3:44:07 PM UTC-5, Skip Montanaro wrote: > > > > if (some_condition and > > some_other_condition and > > some_final_condition): > > play_bingo() > > How about: > > continue_playing = ( >

Re: Continuing indentation

On 2016-03-03 08:29, Ben Finney wrote: > Skip Montanaro writes: >> Running flake8 over some code which has if statements with >> multiple conditions like this: >> >> if (some_condition and >> some_other_condition and >> some_final_condition): >>

Re: Continuing indentation

On 03/02/2016 06:33 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: It's not just name collisions. You should be able to keep in your head every local name in a section of code. Giving a name to a single-use expression wastes one of those precious slots in your mind, even if it's easily and safely unique. If it's

Re: Continuing indentation

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Ben Finney wrote: > If your functions are so long that you fear using a specific name will > deter you from using it again *in the same scope*, then the name isn't > descriptive and a better one should be chosen, or the function is too >

Re: Continuing indentation

Steven D'Aprano writes: > If you only use "continue_playing" in exactly one place, then it > doesn't deserve a name. I disagree. If it's complex, then it may still deserve a name. > > Names are important! > > Too important to waste on every single-use expression. To waste

Re: Continuing indentation

On Thu, 3 Mar 2016 11:02 am, Carl Meyer wrote: > On 03/02/2016 04:54 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:46 AM, wrote: >>> On Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 3:44:07 PM UTC-5, Skip Montanaro wrote: if (some_condition and

Re: Continuing indentation

On Thu, 3 Mar 2016 09:10 am, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Ethan Furman : > >> No, it isn't. Using '\' for line continuation is strongly discouraged. > > Why would you discourage valid syntax? Because it is error-prone and ugly. This is valid syntax too. Do you write your code

Re: Continuing indentation

(Igor, your “From” field doesn't contain a name for you. Can you put your name, e.g. “Igor Whateverisyoursurname”, in the “From” field?) codewiz...@gmail.com writes: > How about: > > continue_playing = ( > some_condition and > some_other_condition and > some_final_condition >

Re: Continuing indentation

Chris Angelico writes: > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:46 AM, wrote: >> On Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 3:44:07 PM UTC-5, Skip Montanaro wrote: >>> >>> if (some_condition and >>> some_other_condition and >>> some_final_condition): >>>

Re: Continuing indentation

On 03/02/2016 04:54 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:46 AM, wrote: >> On Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 3:44:07 PM UTC-5, Skip Montanaro wrote: >>> >>> if (some_condition and >>> some_other_condition and >>> some_final_condition): >>>

Re: Continuing indentation

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:46 AM, wrote: > On Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 3:44:07 PM UTC-5, Skip Montanaro wrote: >> >> if (some_condition and >> some_other_condition and >> some_final_condition): >> play_bingo() > > How about: > >

Re: Continuing indentation

On Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 3:44:07 PM UTC-5, Skip Montanaro wrote: > > if (some_condition and > some_other_condition and > some_final_condition): > play_bingo() How about: continue_playing = ( some_condition and some_other_condition and

Re: Continuing indentation

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Ethan Furman : > >> No, it isn't. Using '\' for line continuation is strongly discouraged. > > Why would you discourage valid syntax? > Isn't that exactly the point of style guides? They

Re: Continuing indentation

On 03/02/2016 02:44 PM, Skip Montanaro wrote: I don't know. Maybe I need to ask the flake8 author about his rationale for this message. It seems to me from my experience with the language that this particular message is going against pretty common practice. Does vim's Python mode exhibit

Re: Continuing indentation

On 03/02/2016 02:10 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: Ethan Furman : No, it isn't. Using '\' for line continuation is strongly discouraged. Why would you discourage valid syntax? 1) It's ugly 2) Any non-newline whitespace after the '\' and you don't have line continuation

Re: Continuing indentation

Thanks for the replies, folks. I'll provide a single response: 1. Using backslash to continue... When I first started using Python in the mid-90s I don't recall that parenthesized expressions could be continued across lines (at least, not in all contexts), so the backslash was required. I believe

Re: Continuing indentation

Ethan Furman : > No, it isn't. Using '\' for line continuation is strongly discouraged. Why would you discourage valid syntax? Marko -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Continuing indentation

On 03/02/2016 12:50 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: Skip Montanaro queried: Running flake8 over some code which has if statements with multiple conditions like this: if (some_condition and some_other_condition and some_final_condition): play_bingo() [...] is there a

Re: Continuing indentation

Skip Montanaro writes: > Running flake8 over some code which has if statements with multiple > conditions like this: > > if (some_condition and > some_other_condition and > some_final_condition): > play_bingo() > > the tool complains that the

Re: Continuing indentation

Skip Montanaro wrote: > Running flake8 over some code which has if statements with multiple > conditions like this: > > if (some_condition and > some_other_condition and > some_final_condition): > play_bingo() > > the tool complains that the indentation of the

Re: Continuing indentation

On 3/2/2016 21:43, Skip Montanaro wrote: Running flake8 over some code which has if statements with multiple conditions like this: if (some_condition and some_other_condition and some_final_condition): play_bingo() the tool complains that the indentation of the

Re: Continuing indentation

Skip Montanaro : > Running flake8 over some code which has if statements with multiple > conditions like this: > > if (some_condition and > some_other_condition and > some_final_condition): > play_bingo() > [...] > > is there a better way to

Continuing indentation

Running flake8 over some code which has if statements with multiple conditions like this: if (some_condition and some_other_condition and some_final_condition): play_bingo() the tool complains that the indentation of the conditions is the same as the next block. In