On Thursday, September 5, 2013 11:01:31 PM UTC-5, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 19:59:34 -0700, Metallicow wrote: > > PEP8 needs a bit of revision anyway, In my opinion... According to > > real-world standards for equipment/devices. linking to a table/list of > > affected devices/minNumbers should be the norm. or.... > > I don't believe you have thought this through, or in any detail. The > first problem is, what "real-world standards" are you talking about? What > sort of devices are you referring to? How is this supposed to work in > practice? If I write a Python module, which device am I supposed to pick?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revision Why even define a number? I causes people to argue about it. It is a variable. I meant a "Reference" Table of equipment/devices. Most Auto shop have a "Cross-Reference book". Also Johnny Cash built a vehicle from 30 years or so different years parts(or I know people who do/can). Reference PEP8 standard to: A Technical manual per say. If not make it simple. A multiple of 10, 80 being the closest int and also errors on 79 devices. Which then said device should be added to the reference manual. Or 70. Also the pro/cons of this argument should be added to a "Quick-Reference". Sorry if my opinion was not clear, the first time I posted. As I have been answered before, you CANNOT edit posts here. But you could with python... -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
