On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 at 21:06, Ethan Furman <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote: > > On 2/27/23 12:20, rbowman wrote: > > > "By using Black, you agree to cede control over minutiae of hand- > > formatting. In return, Black gives you speed, determinism, and freedom > > from pycodestyle nagging about formatting. You will save time and mental > > energy for more important matters." > > > > Somehow I don't think we would get along very well. I'm a little on the > > opinionated side myself. > > I personally cannot stand Black. It feels like every major choice it makes > (and some minor ones) are exactly the > opposite of the choice I make.
I agree partially. There are two types of decisions black makes: 1. Leave the code alone because it seems okay or make small modifications. 2. Reformat the code because it violates some generic rule (like line too long or something). I've recently tried Black and mostly for my code it seems to go with 1 (code looks okay). There might be some minor changes like double vs single quotes but I really don't care about those. In that sense me and Black seem to agree. However I have also reviewed code where it is clear that the author has used black and their code came under case 2. In that case Black seems to produce awful things. What I can't understand is someone accepting the awful rewrite rather than just fixing the code. Treating Black almost like a linter makes sense to me but accepting the rewrites that it offers for bad code does not. -- Oscar -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
