From: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
To: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-block@nongnu.org,
"Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Max Reitz" <mreitz@redhat.com>,
armbru@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 06/10] iotests: limit line length to 79 chars
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 13:34:22 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ed00ca8a-f6bf-71b8-dcd3-dbd0902e9306@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200306101425.GC7240@linux.fritz.box>
On 3/6/20 5:14 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 05.03.2020 um 19:25 hat John Snow geschrieben:
>> On 3/5/20 6:55 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>>> Am 05.03.2020 um 00:14 hat John Snow geschrieben:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/4/20 4:58 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>>
>>> Adding back the context:
>>>
>>>> - sys.stderr.write('qemu-img received signal %i: %s\n' % (-exitcode, ' '.join(qemu_img_args + list(args))))
>>>> + sys.stderr.write('qemu-img received signal %i: %s\n' % (
>>>> + -exitcode, ' '.join(qemu_img_args + list(args))))
>>>
>>>>> Do we want to indent Python like C and align argument below opening
>>>>> parenthesis? Except when using sys.stderr.write() you seem to do it.
>>>>
>>>> This isn't an argument to write, it's an argument to the format string,
>>>> so I will say "no."
>>>
>>> The argument to write() is an expression. This expression contains the %
>>> operator with both of its operands. It's still fully within the
>>> parentheses of write(), so I think Philippe's question is valid.
>>>
>>>> For *where* I've placed the line break, this is the correct indentation.
>>>> emacs's python mode will settle on this indent, too.
>>>>
>>>> https://python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#indentation
>>>
>>> The PEP-8 examples are not nested, so it's not completely clear. I
>>> wonder if hanging indents wouldn't actually mean the following because
>>> if you line wrap an argument list (which contains the whole %
>>> expression), you're supposed to have nothing else on the line of the
>>> opening parenthesis:
>>>
>>> sys.stderr.write(
>>> 'qemu-img received signal %i: %s\n'
>>> % (-exitcode, ' '.join(qemu_img_args + list(args))))
>>>
>>
>> This is fine too.
>>
>>> But anyway, I think the question is more whether we want to use hanging
>>> indents at all (or at least if we want to use it even in cases where the
>>> opening parenthesis isn't already at like 70 characters) when we're
>>> avoiding it in our C coding style.
>>>
>>> There's no technical answer to this, it's a question of our preferences.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe it is ambiguous. Long lines are just ugly everywhere.
>>
>>>> (If anyone quotes Guido's belittling comment in this email, I will
>>>> become cross.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But there are other places to put the line break. This is also
>>>> technically valid:
>>>>
>>>> sys.stderr.write('qemu-img received signal %i: %s\n'
>>>> % (-exitcode, ' '.join(qemu_img_args + list(args))))
>>>>
>>>> And so is this:
>>>>
>>>> sys.stderr.write('qemu-img received signal %i: %s\n' %
>>>> (-exitcode, ' '.join(qemu_img_args + list(args))))
>>>
>>> PEP-8 suggests the former, but allows both styles:
>>>
>>> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#should-a-line-break-before-or-after-a-binary-operator
>>>
>>
>> So in summary:
>>
>> - Avoid nested hanging indents from format operators
>> - Use a line break before the % format operator.
>> - OPTIONALLY(?), use a hanging indent for the entire format string to
>> reduce nesting depth.
>
> Yes, though I don't think of it as a special case for format strings. So
> I would phrase it like this:
>
> - Don't use hanging indent for any nested parentheses unless the outer
> parentheses use hanging indents, too.
> - Use a line break before binary operators.
> - OPTIONALLY, use a hanging indent for the top level(s) to reduce
> nesting depth.
>
> The first one is the only rule that involves some interpretation of
> PEP-8, the rest seems to be its unambiguous recommendation.
>
> Anyway, so I would apply the exact same rules to the following (imagine
> even longer expressions, especially the last example doesn't make sense
> with the short numbers):
>
> * bad:
> really_long_function_name(-1234567890 + 987654321 * (
> 1337 / 42))
>
> * ok:
> really_long_function_name(-1234567890 + 987654321
> * (1337 / 42))
>
> * ok:
> really_long_function_name(
> -1234567890 + 987654321
> * (1337 / 42))
>
> * ok:
> really_long_function_name(
> -1234567890 + 987654321 * (
> 1337 / 42))
>
>> e.g., either this form:
>> (using a line break before the binary operator and nesting to the
>> argument level)
>>
>> write('hello %s'
>> % (world,))
>>
>>
>> or optionally this form if it buys you a little more room:
>> (using a hanging indent of 4 spaces and nesting arguments at that level)
>>
>> write(
>> 'hello %s'
>> % ('world',))
>>
>>
>> but not ever this form:
>> (Using a hanging indent of 4 spaces from the opening paren of the format
>> operand)
>>
>> write('hello %s' % (
>> 'world',))
>>
>>
>>
>> yea/nea?
>>
>> (Kevin, Philippe, Markus, Max)
>
> Looks good to me.
>
> Kevin
>
Great, thanks!
I am sorry for having been so tetchy. I appreciate the reviews.
--js
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-06 18:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-04 21:38 [PATCH v7 00/10] iotests: use python logging John Snow
2020-03-04 21:38 ` [PATCH v7 01/10] iotests: do a light delinting John Snow
2020-03-04 21:45 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-03-04 22:43 ` John Snow
2020-03-04 21:38 ` [PATCH v7 02/10] iotests: don't use 'format' for drive_add John Snow
2020-03-04 21:38 ` [PATCH v7 03/10] iotests: ignore import warnings from pylint John Snow
2020-03-04 21:38 ` [PATCH v7 04/10] iotests: replace mutable list default args John Snow
2020-03-04 21:59 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-03-04 21:38 ` [PATCH v7 05/10] iotests: add pylintrc file John Snow
2020-03-04 21:38 ` [PATCH v7 06/10] iotests: limit line length to 79 chars John Snow
2020-03-04 21:58 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-03-04 23:14 ` John Snow
2020-03-05 11:55 ` Kevin Wolf
2020-03-05 18:25 ` John Snow
2020-03-06 10:14 ` Kevin Wolf
2020-03-06 18:34 ` John Snow [this message]
2020-03-07 6:36 ` Markus Armbruster
2020-03-04 21:38 ` [PATCH v7 07/10] iotests: add script_initialize John Snow
2020-03-04 21:38 ` [PATCH v7 08/10] iotest 258: use script_main John Snow
2020-03-04 21:38 ` [PATCH v7 09/10] iotests: Mark verify functions as private John Snow
2020-03-04 21:47 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-03-04 21:38 ` [PATCH v7 10/10] iotests: use python logging for iotests.log() John Snow
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ed00ca8a-f6bf-71b8-dcd3-dbd0902e9306@redhat.com \
--to=jsnow@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=philmd@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).