[Python-ideas] pep 7 line break suggestion differs from pep 8

[Guido van Rossum]

[ideas to bcc]

I'm not as excited about this as I am about the PEP 8 change.

PEP 8 affects most Python programmers.

But PEP 7 is really just for CPython and its extensions, and I don't think
it has found anything like as widespread a following as PEP 8.

I worry that if we change this in PEP 7 we'll just see either massing
inconsistent code or endless diffs that do nothing but change the
formatting (and occasionally introduce a bug).

And I don't think it would do as much good -- reading and understanding C
code is primarily a matter of knowing the language, and the audience is
much more heavily skewed towards experts.

IOW, -1.

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Chris Angelico <rosuav at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:33 AM, Joseph Jevnik <joejev at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I saw that there was recently a change to pep 8 to suggest adding a line
> > break before a binary operator. Pep 7 suggests the opposite:
> >
> >> When you break a long expression at a binary operator, the operator goes
> >> at the end of the previous line, e.g.:
> >
> >> if (type->tp_dictoffset != 0 && base->tp_dictoffset == 0 &&
> >>     type->tp_dictoffset == b_size &&
> >>     (size_t)t_size == b_size + sizeof(PyObject *))
> >>     return 0; /* "Forgive" adding a __dict__ only */
> >
> > I imagine that some of the reasons for making the change in pep 8 for
> > readability reasons will also
> > translate to C; maybe pep 7 should also be updated.
>
> I would agree with this. Passing it directly to python-dev as that's
> where the key decision makers are.
>
> ChrisA
> _______________________________________________
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>



-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20160418/f20243ee/attachment-0001.html>