Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder2.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder.news-service.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path: <rosuav@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: python-list@python.org
Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status: OK 0.009
X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.98; '*S*': 0.00; 'python.': 0.04; 'operator': 0.05; 'continuation': 0.07; 'operator,': 0.09; 'tuple': 0.09; 'programmer': 0.10; 'am,': 0.12; 'subsequent': 0.15; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'ignores': 0.16; 'parentheses': 0.16; 'parsed': 0.16; 'unary': 0.16; 'syntax': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'wed,': 0.17; '>>>': 0.18; "doesn't": 0.22; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.22; 'pm,': 0.24; 'skip:( 30': 0.24; 'aug': 0.24; 'code': 0.25; 'separate': 0.28; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.29; 'lines': 0.30; 'booth': 0.30; 'error': 0.32; 'chris': 0.32; 'error.': 0.32; 'usually': 0.32; 'too': 0.33; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.33; 'done': 0.34; 'assignment': 0.34; 'forces': 0.34; 'read,': 0.36; 'another': 0.37; 'languages': 0.37; 'but': 0.37; 'something': 0.37; 'some': 0.38; 'received:google.com': 0.38; 'received:209.85': 0.38; 'easier': 0.38; 'skip:o 20': 0.38; 'subject:: ': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; "i'd": 0.40; 'might': 0.40; 'happens': 0.40; 'results': 0.61; 'legal': 0.70; 'imagine': 0.71; 'subject:line': 0.73; '10:56': 0.84; 'risk.': 0.84; 'sommers': 0.84; "everything's": 0.91; 'arise': 0.96
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ni2SbpAhZxsSWJrEqyU6CQONMWfiwbRbAV5tNhzDUgc=; b=JT1r9PcZhXeFqUEiVg37syLOc2dPqZe7DAqDBaS7rbOWvMtVPhr7qlhQPUQroD/t42 pDt13YMDd+xwPmfJtU8QmwpPVVqpWUrrbxU+gHrCMKxNEEtZmF1TPgZvzyH2soeCJyw2 IRsk/MTPrEw40KldJFBJ1I56N3pkrGjKQOu5I=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <Xns9F3D8883BD21Aduncanbooth@127.0.0.1>
References: <1312951356.77394.YahooMailNeo@web121518.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <CAMZYqRRh-kSoSjywrQH=jkeysPRwms6O376dPOyTqkZtdgG_jQ@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.2085.1312956463.1164.python-list@python.org> <4e424208$0$29965$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <pan.2011.08.10.09.56.19@tombstonezero.net> <mailman.2096.1312971973.1164.python-list@python.org> <Xns9F3D8883BD21Aduncanbooth@127.0.0.1>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:42:30 +0100
Subject: Re: allow line break at operators
From: Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
To: python-list@python.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list>
List-Post: <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help: <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.2101.1312980152.1164.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 48
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace: 1312980152 news.xs4all.nl 23943 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:56814
X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:11116

On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Duncan Booth
<duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Dan Sommers <dan@tombstonezero.net>
>> wrote:
>>> In terms of easier to read, I find code easier to read when the
>>> operators are at the beginnings of the lines (PEP 8 notwithstanding):
>>>
>>> =A0 =A0x =3D (someobject.somemethod(object3, thing)
>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 + longfunctionname(object2)
>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 + otherfunction(value1, value2, value3))
>>>
>>
>> Without the parentheses, this is legal but (probably) useless; it
>> applies the unary + operator to the return value of those functions.
>
> No, in some other languages it might be legal, but this is Python.
> without the parentheses it is a syntax error.

It would be parsed as three separate statements. The only reason it
would be a syntax error would be because of the indentation, which is
not what I'd call reliable; it happens to catch this case, because
assignment doesn't allow subsequent lines to be indented, but nothing
forces continuation lines to be indented.

x =3D (5
+4)

x =3D 5
+4

What we have is a strangeness that can arise when a programmer ignores
something that is often insignificant; spare parentheses usually don't
matter.

Another potential danger is the similarity with tuple creation:

x =3D (someobject.somemethod(object3, thing)
 =A0 =A0 + longfunctionname(object2)
 =A0 =A0 + otherfunction(value1, value2, value3),)

This is a tuple with one element. Not too bad with the + operator, but
imagine if everything's done with method chaining on . which results
in the , being nearly indistinguishable. Not an insurmountable
problem, but a potential risk.

ChrisA