On Nov 14, 2013, at 10:00 AM, Monty Taylor <mord...@inaugust.com> wrote:
> > > On 11/13/2013 08:08 PM, Robert Collins wrote: >> On 14 November 2013 13:59, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> wrote: >> >>> This is an area where we actually have consensus in our docs (have had >>> for a while), the reviewer was being consistent with them, and it feels >>> like you are reopening that for personal preference. >> >> Sorry that it feels that way. My personal code also uses () >> overwhelmingly - so this isn't a personal agenda issue. I brought it >> up because the person that wrote the code had chosen to use \, and as >> far as I knew we didn't have a hard decision either way - and the >> style guide we have talks preference not requirement, but the review >> didn't distinguish between whether it's a suggestion or a requirement. >> I'm seeking clarity so I can review more effectively and so that our >> code doesn't end up consistent but hard to read. > > I'd say we've got an expression of clarity here - which means > potentially a patch to the hacking guide to clarify the language on what > our choice is, as well as the addition of a hacking check to enforce it > would be in bounds. +1 to sticking something in hacking. FWIW I would probably do the following to avoid the debate altogether: result = self._path_file_exists(ds_browser, folder_path, file_name) folder_exists, file_exists, file_size_in_kb, disk_extents = result Vish > >>> Honestly I find \ at the end of a line ugly as sin, and completely >>> jarring to read. I actually do like the second one better. I don't care >>> enough to change a policy on it, but we do already have a policy, so it >>> seems pretty pedantic, and not useful. >> >> Ok, thats interesting. Readability matters, and if most folk find that >> even this case - which is pretty much the one case where I would argue >> for \ - is still easier to read with (), then thats cool. >> >>> Bringing up for debate the style guide every time it disagrees with your >>> personal preference isn't a very effective use of people's time. >>> Especially on settled matters. >> >> Totally not what I'm doing. I've been told that much of our style >> guide was copied lock stock and barrel from some Google Python style >> guide, so I can't tell what is consensus and what is 'what someone >> copied down one day'. Particularly when there is no rationale included >> against the point - its a black box and entirely opaque. >> >> -Rob >> > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
