Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #31626

Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness

References <mailman.2403.1350540402.27098.python-list@python.org> <507fa256$0$11093$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>
From Zero Piraeus <schesis@gmail.com>
Date 2012-10-18 06:31 -0400
Subject Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Message-ID <mailman.2423.1350556333.27098.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

:

There seems to be a consensus [to the extent there ever is, anyway]
around using parentheses etc., then ...

On 18 October 2012 02:31, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
> I've been burnt enough by word-wrapping in editors that don't handle word-
> wrapping that well that it makes me really uncomfortable to go over 78-79
> characters, even by only 1 extra. So I don't like doing this.

I have to admit, I try quite hard not to exceed 78. I don't know why
[never been bitten by badly behaved editors], but something about 79
characters in an 80-char window makes me uncomfortable.

> Just about the only time I go over is if I have a comment that includes a
> URL with more than 78 characters. I hate breaking URLs more than I hate
> breaking the 79 character limit.

Agreed.

> You missed one:
>
> 5a. Perform an assignment to a temp variable that you really should have
> done anyway, but reducing the number of characters in the line was the
> impetus that finally made you act.

Ah. Yes :-)

On 18 October 2012 05:33,  <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> wrote:
> I use a "double indentation".
>
>>>> if 'asdf' and 'asdf' and 'asdf' \
> ...         'asdf' and 'asdf' and \
> ...         'asdf' and 'asdf':
> ...     print('do if')
> ...     s = 'asdf'
> ...     ss = 'asdf'

Actually, I had a follow-up question about indentation planned. I used
to double-indent, but am now more likely to go with e.g.

>>> if check_something(
...     arg1,
...     arg2,
...     arg3
... ):
...     do_something()

as others have suggested. An alternative would be something like

>>> if check_something(arg1,
...                    arg2,
...                    arg3):
...     do_something()

which I like much less. I have to admit, though, that all the original
options make me feel a little dirty except (#4) "shorter variable
names" [which just makes me feel that I am being overly precious] and
(#6 generalised) "this needs refactoring" [which I would say includes
Steven's #5a].

 -[]z.

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Zero Piraeus <schesis@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 02:06 -0400
  Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-10-18 06:31 +0000
    Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Hans Mulder <hansmu@xs4all.nl> - 2012-10-18 11:07 +0200
      Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2012-10-18 02:33 -0700
        Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2012-10-18 06:05 -0500
      Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 21:01 +1100
      RE: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-10-18 18:42 +0000
      Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2012-10-19 11:33 +1100
        Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 20:35 -0700
          Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-10-19 04:08 +0000
    Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Zero Piraeus <schesis@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 06:31 -0400
  Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-10-17 23:55 -0700
  Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-17 23:56 -0700
  Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-10-18 13:16 +0000
    Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2012-10-19 11:39 +1100
  Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Den <patentsvnc@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 08:55 -0700
    Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2012-10-18 16:13 +0000
      Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 03:21 +1100
      RE: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-10-18 18:51 +0000
    RE: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-10-18 18:50 +0000
    Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Zero Piraeus <schesis@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 17:36 -0400
      Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-10-19 01:50 +0000
  Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Den <patentsvnc@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 08:55 -0700
    Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-10-18 17:44 +0000
      Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2012-10-18 18:53 -0400
  Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Krzysztof Voss <shobbo@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 15:16 -0700
  Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Krzysztof Voss <shobbo@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 15:16 -0700

csiph-web