Allowing comments after the line continuation backslash

[Ben Finney]

Roy Smith <roy at panix.com> writes:

> In article <iaq5ro$vpc$4 at lust.ihug.co.nz>,
>  Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo at geek-central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
>
> > In message <roy-A96D07.07462302112010 at news.panix.com>, Roy Smith wrote:
> > 
> > > In this case, I think I would do:
> > > 
> > > styles = [("normal",      "image",     MainWindow.ColorsNormalList),
> > >           ("highlighted", "highlight", MainWindow.ColorsHighlightedList),
> > >           ("selected",    "select",    MainWindow.ColorsSelectedList)]
> > > 
> > > for in description, attr, color_list in styles:
> > >    blah, blah, blah

I would do the same, but fix the indentation. Making indentation depend
on the *length* of the previous line is needlessly making a maintenance
burden.

Instead, I'd do::

    styles = [
        ("normal",      "image",     MainWindow.ColorsNormalList),
        ("highlighted", "highlight", MainWindow.ColorsHighlightedList),
        ("selected",    "select",    MainWindow.ColorsSelectedList)]
    
    for in description, attr, color_list in styles:
        # blah, blah, blah

A single consistent level of indentation on continuation lines, no
matter what happens to the first line.

> Where we seem to disagree is whether that makes things more or less
> readable :-) To me, it makes is more readable because it lets me
> understand one chunk, then move on to understanding the next chunk.

Agreed.

> You may disagree.  That's OK.

It's okay until that code gets out in the wild; then it's no longer just
a matter of one person's taste. Hence the need for conventions.

-- 
 \       “Anyone who puts a small gloss on [a] fundamental technology, |
  `\          calls it proprietary, and then tries to keep others from |
_o__)           building on it, is a thief.” —Tim O'Reilly, 2000-01-25 |
Ben Finney