Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.006 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'convention.': 0.07; 'extent': 0.07; 'pep': 0.09; 'to:addr:pobox.com': 0.09; 'to:addr:skip': 0.09; 'width': 0.09; 'wrapped': 0.09; 'cc:addr :python-list': 0.11; 'python': 0.11; '(just': 0.16; '36,': 0.16; '46,': 0.16; 'columns': 0.16; 'lengths': 0.16; 'limit.': 0.16; 'pep8': 0.16; 'tempted': 0.16; 'wastes': 0.16; 'wider': 0.16; ':-)': 0.16; 'sender:addr:gmail.com': 0.17; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'basically': 0.19; 'normally': 0.19; 'things.': 0.19; 'written': 0.21; 'code,': 0.22; 'rules': 0.22; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.22; 'cc:2**1': 0.23; 'skip': 0.24; '(or': 0.24; '>': 0.26; 'long,': 0.26; 'this:': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'thus': 0.29; "doesn't": 0.30; 'characters': 0.30; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; 'code': 0.31; 'lines': 0.31; 'convince': 0.31; 'follows': 0.31; 'probably': 0.32; 'skip:c 30': 0.32; 'everyone': 0.33; 'comment': 0.34; 'screen': 0.34; "i'd": 0.34; 'common': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'project': 0.37; 'easily': 0.37; 'window': 0.38; 'skip:& 20': 0.39; 'space': 0.40; '8bit%:6': 0.40; 'how': 0.40; 'days': 0.60; 'blank': 0.60; 'skip:c 50': 0.60; 'skip:\xc2 10': 0.60; 'most': 0.60; 'tell': 0.60; 'today.': 0.61; 'new': 0.61; 'real': 0.63; 'personal': 0.63; 'july': 0.63; 'stand': 0.64; 'finally': 0.65; 'benefit': 0.68; 'promise': 0.68; 'increasing': 0.74; '100': 0.79; '102': 0.84; '2013': 0.98 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=hN/CFN0KImQ7hmx6KYL0dfblbdif7bFSbvPGde5WuwI=; b=WvLrBKud5pJvuA0CQ7sKoKoz5nkkRfgxmue4ZnJ0CbqhIzhiY6s6M8S7fCkj25Uh9N fWh55CrhK9tzkgUboocjQbDJWGVNCRcXC8FcWM5D8uqTW41+0NykkK4fVcqidkUlLuyM WC2A0RIq52fZtLT3Y6E7afScDjdYKNwY0tflnvFqspAI1k526H+T+sLhO0m7vwFQSY4q 4LXBXNNFlfOXaTg4XTlppXNt7Ez3Ajk1DMrMs3muVgFiy2Qh5tInW2n7GjC9bUlsopIJ SJQf59w8I8rZL86ZrV5zm8pi6OQNMf50GHtnfxmlplKy6gCvvvyJj+cKCyxm+kzkVCur aKNA== X-Received: by 10.112.52.97 with SMTP id s1mr28141816lbo.8.1375202522786; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 09:42:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: joshua.landau.ws@gmail.com In-Reply-To: References: <51F6C5F5.5020201@Gmail.com> From: Joshua Landau Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 17:41:22 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Vsi2_P7rbMpr1RWmpA_yDrzCZkw Subject: Re: PEP8 79 char max To: Skip Montanaro Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3ecdedd73f204e2bd4937 Cc: python-list , Neil Cerutti X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 118 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1375202530 news.xs4all.nl 15915 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:59805 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:51582 --001a11c3ecdedd73f204e2bd4937 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 30 July 2013 16:44, Skip Montanaro wrote: > > So if everyone basically follows PEP8 we all benefit from playing by > > the same game rules, as it were. > > (I think I'm agreeing with you, but nonetheless, I will forge ahead.) > > To the extent that 80-column window widths have been common for so > long, PEP 8 or not (and Python or not), there is a ton of code out > there which abides by that convention. More-or-less unilaterally > increasing the recommended max line width to 100 (or 99?) columns > isn't likely to improve things. People like me (who prefer the status > quo) will complain about all the new-fangled code written to a wider > standard (and will be tempted to reformat). People who like the new > standard will complain about old code wasting all that white space > (and will be tempted to reformat). :-) > > Finally (I promise this is my last word on the topic), most lines > don't need to be wrapped as they stand today. See the attached graph > for the distribution of line lengths for the current project where I > spend most of my time these days (just Python code, blank lines > elided, comment lines included). Stretching the max out to 100 > columns when most lines are less than 60 columns just wastes screen > real estate. > Your graph doesn't convince me. Take this line from earlier, which is currently 102 characters and nearing my personal limit. completer = completer.Completer(bindings=[r'"\C-xo": overwrite-mode', r'"\C-xd": dump-functions']) Under rules to wrap to 80 characters (and in this case I'd probably do it anyway), I'd normally wrap to this: completer = completer.Completer(bindings=[ r'"\C-xo": overwrite-mode', r'"\C-xd": dump-functions' ]) of line lengths 46, 36, 35 and 6 respectively. Thus it's impossible to so easily tell how many lines would be "unwrapped" from your graph. --001a11c3ecdedd73f204e2bd4937 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 30 July 2013 16:44, Skip Montanaro &l= t;skip@pobox.com>= ; wrote:
> So if everyone basically follows PEP8 we all benefit= from playing by
> the same game rules, as it were.

(I think I'm agreeing with you, but nonetheless, I will forge ahe= ad.)

To the extent that 80-column window widths have been common for so
long, PEP 8 or not (and Python or not), there is a ton of code out
there which abides by that convention. =C2=A0More-or-less unilaterally
increasing the recommended max line width to 100 (or 99?) columns
isn't likely to improve things. =C2=A0People like me (who prefer the st= atus
quo) will complain about all the new-fangled code written to a wider
standard (and will be tempted to reformat). =C2=A0People who like the new standard will complain about old code wasting all that white space
(and will be tempted to reformat). :-)

Finally (I promise this is my last word on the topic), most lines
don't need to be wrapped as they stand today. =C2=A0See the attached gr= aph
for the distribution of line lengths for the current project where I
spend most of my time these days (just Python code, blank lines
elided, comment lines included). =C2=A0Stretching the max out to 100
columns when most lines are less than 60 columns just wastes screen
real estate.

Your graph doesn't con= vince me.

Take this line from earlier, which is cu= rrently 102 characters and nearing my personal limit.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 c= ompleter =3D completer.Completer(bindings=3D[r'"\C-xo": overwrite-mod= e', r'"\C-xd": dump-functions'])

Under rules to wrap to 80 characters (and in this= case I'd probably do it anyway), I'd normally wrap to this:
<= div>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 completer =3D completer.Completer(bindings=3D[
=C2=A0 r'"\C-xo": = overwrite-mode',
=C2=A0 r'"\= C-xd": dump-functions'
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 ])

of lin= e lengths 46, 36, 35 and 6 respectively. Thus it's impossible to so eas= ily tell how many lines would be "unwrapped" from your graph.
--001a11c3ecdedd73f204e2bd4937--