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


Groups > comp.lang.python > #31599 > unrolled thread

Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness

Started byDemian Brecht <demianbrecht@gmail.com>
First post2012-10-17 23:52 -0700
Last post2012-10-17 23:52 -0700
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness Demian Brecht <demianbrecht@gmail.com> - 2012-10-17 23:52 -0700

#31599 — Re: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness

FromDemian Brecht <demianbrecht@gmail.com>
Date2012-10-17 23:52 -0700
SubjectRe: A desperate lunge for on-topic-ness
Message-ID<mailman.2407.1350543182.27098.python-list@python.org>
> 3. Say "well, at least it's not a backslash" and break the line using
> parentheses.

This. More times than not, there's a function call in that line, which
makes sense to me when reading it if the args are on the next line.

> 4. Spend 45 minutes trying to think up shorter [but still sensible]
> variable names to make it fit.

I generally can't shorten my variable names without breaking the
minimum length PEP8 rule ;)


Now having said that, it kind of depends on the code base I'm working
with. If it's my own project, I never go past 79 characters (vim
tw=79). However, if it's a code base that I didn't start and it seems
to consistently go past 79 characters, I'll usually follow suit (with
my feet dragging of course). Nothing worse than inconsistency, even if
it's a standard I don't necessarily agree with :P

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python


csiph-web