[Python-ideas] gofmt for Python: standardized styling as a language feature

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Donald Stufft writes:

 > Working on the Python stdlib is somewhat frustrating to me in this
 > regard because the code in the stdlib is often times wildly
 > inconsistent even within the same module.

Maybe you haven't paid attention to past discussions, but the Python
stdlib is a terrible example because fixing it up is a FAQ on this
list, on core-mentoriship, and (in the past) on python-dev.  It has
been repeatedly vetoed on the grounds that changes, even in
whitespace, are likely to introduce more bugs than consistent style is
worth.

If you're actually working *on* the stdlib, then improve the style as
you fix bugs or add features.  If you are working on something that
requires studying the stdlib, then you're out of luck.

None of the above means that improving the stdlib's coding style is
off the table as far as I'm concerned.  I personally wouldn't mind
seeing it happen, but I don't care that much.

What it means is simply that the stdlib is the worst possible example
to make your case -- everybody agrees with you about the inconsistent
style, but Those Who Make Decisions Around Here think there are more
important considerations than style.

 > I was merely offering my experience that *anything* which relies on
 > a human to verify it is, without exception, going to be verified
 > unevenly and that using a human to verify it invites people to
 > attempt to argue against it more often than when a machine does it.

But the stdlib is a terrible example for that purpose for the same
reason.

But I take your point that using a machine can smooth correction of
"mechanical" errors.  Mine is simply that I don't see that it makes
such a big difference in my experience; most people who have horrible
coding styles respond to human advice quite well, and the "minor"
differences are -- minor.

YMMV.