From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18125 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2010 15:17:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 18112 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Oct 2010 15:17:50 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 15:17:46 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C2A52BACAC; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 11:17:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id KMWe-R9LG-Wh; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 11:17:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5789B2BACAE; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 11:17:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D1E28F5895; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 08:17:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 15:17:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Phil Muldoon Cc: Doug Evans , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Python coding style [was Re: [RFA] New python module gdb.types] Message-ID: <20101008151740.GE12651@adacore.com> References: <4CACEBEA.1080900@redhat.com> <20101006222337.GC2784@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-10/txt/msg00141.txt.bz2 > My own opinion is that we should purely not opt for one particular > flavor because there exists a vacuum. Why not follow the PEP to the > letter? The Google guide looks sane, and really nice. But what are the > strong feelings the project should add this particular sauce over the > PEP? I just want to briefly examine those questions. I think we are in a violent agreement, here. The Google guide is interesting, not because of its (relatively short) section on formatting, but because it gives some brief tips of things that we should or should not do when writing Python code. My initial reaction when learning Python was pretty negative because it wasn't the perfect language I was lead to believe. If you read the "Learning Python" book, you'll find that pretty much every chapter in that book has a "gotchas" section at the end... -- Joel