[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Add rules for indenting continuation lines.
v+python at g.nevcal.com
Fri Jun 3 01:16:30 CEST 2011
On 6/2/2011 3:49 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Except that the rule gets more complicated. I don't think that always
> using the double indent is going to mean a lot more line breaks, so I
> don't think there's much benefit to the added complication.
Further, tools like python-mode would have to go back and fix the indent
to be double indented when there are multiple lines, and the : is not
typed until the last line... not impossible, but more complicated, and
some of the intervening lines might be too long for the double indent,
and then manual adjustments would have to happen. Ick.
Double indent from the beginning, if there is nothing after the (.
Or key the double indent off the leading keywords that end with :
Here's a language question, though: if there are keywords that imply the
need for a :, and it isn't on the same line, why is \ needed to continue
to the next line (or parentheses, etc.)?
If the : is truly omitted, like I did in my example, there'll be other
syntax errors to report. If it is just on a later line, why complain
about it missing?
With complex conditions, I wind up adding extra () rather than trailing
\, and that is about the only time I have ever found the need to use \
(but my workaround is to add the ()).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-Dev