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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #68475

Re: 'complex' function with string argument.

References <8c862bec-815e-424c-81e2-8f37ebab1c35@googlegroups.com> <loom.20140317T184835-830@post.gmane.org> <lg7rle$4q0$1@ger.gmane.org> <CANc-5UzEHLBDcHVdt9odKX24hp7=rdGtBTBiWjO7Me_BEwgGDg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPTjJmpMw7fnU9L8OKMSvyQJZ8t9uM3VbzZxHzwoU0dV6wHaLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date 2014-03-17 20:07 -0500
Subject Re: 'complex' function with string argument.
From Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Message-ID <mailman.8234.1395104861.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Perhaps it's worth pointing out that pylint complains about most/many
>> infix operations if you don't surround the operator with white space.
>
> IMO that's excessive. Not every infix operator needs whitespace.

I wasn't suggesting it was the only way things could be done. Just
pointing out that there is enough common practice out there to suggest
that white space around infix operators is often the preferred way of
doing things. Quoting from PEP 8:

If operators with different priorities are used, consider adding
whitespace around the operators with the lowest priority(ies). Use
your own judgment; however, never use more than one space, and always
have the same amount of whitespace on both sides of a binary operator.

Yes:

i = i + 1
submitted += 1
x = x*2 - 1
hypot2 = x*x + y*y
c = (a+b) * (a-b)

...

My point is that accommodating white space around the + or - sign
isn't altogether unreasonable.

Maybe PEP 8 needs to be tweaked with an example of good complex
literal practice?

Skip

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

Thread

'complex' function with string argument. Jayanth Koushik <jnkoushik@gmail.com> - 2014-03-15 09:26 -0700
  Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-17 11:18 -0500
    Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 04:03 +1100
      Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-17 20:15 +0200
        Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-17 12:28 -0600
        Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 05:59 +1100
          Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-17 21:22 +0200
            Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 06:32 +1100
            Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-18 04:08 +0000
      Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-17 13:20 -0500
    Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-18 04:52 +0000
      Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 15:59 +1100
      Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 11:14 -0500
        Re: 'complex' function with string argument. wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-03-19 00:30 -0700
          Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-19 10:51 +0200
            Re: 'complex' function with string argument. wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-03-19 02:52 -0700
              Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-19 12:09 +0200
                Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-19 04:33 -0600
                Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-19 12:53 +0200
                Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-19 13:35 -0600
                Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2014-03-19 06:04 -0500
                Re: 'complex' function with string argument. wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-03-19 07:35 -0700
                Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-19 12:45 -0600
  Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Mark Dickinson <mdickinson@enthought.com> - 2014-03-17 17:55 +0000
  Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-17 18:06 -0400
  Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2014-03-17 18:59 -0500
  Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 11:16 +1100
  Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2014-03-17 20:07 -0500
  Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-03-18 08:04 +0100
    Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 18:11 +1100
    Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-18 08:00 +0000
      Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-03-18 09:21 +0100
        Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-18 16:00 +0200

csiph-web