From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
To: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Cc: Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com>,
Cleber Rosa <crosa@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/19] flake8: Enforce shorter line length for comments and docstrings
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 10:35:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87pmz5cgwu.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <33866c5d-1eab-739c-f2e8-a35f4a0b0f55@redhat.com> (John Snow's message of "Fri, 26 Mar 2021 12:30:37 -0400")
John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> writes:
> On 3/26/21 2:26 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 3/25/21 11:21 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>>> John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> PEP8's BDFL writes: "For flowing long blocks of text with fewer
>>>>> structural restrictions (docstrings or comments), the line length should
>>>>> be limited to 72 characters."
>>>>>
>>>>> I do not like this patch. I have included it explicitly to recommend we
>>>>> do not pay any further heed to the 72 column limit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to get the remainder of this series moving again before digging
>>>> into this patch.
>>>
>>> I am dropping it, then -- I have no interest in bringing a patch I
>>> dislike along for another respin.
>> Despite your dislike, there might be good parts, and if there are,
>> I'd
>> like to mine them. I don't need you to track the patch for that,
>> though. Feel free to drop it.
>> Thank you for exploring the max-doc-length option.
>>
>
> Being less terse about it: Mostly, I don't like how it enforces this
> column width even for indented structures. Generally, we claim that 72
> columns is "comfortable to read" and I agree.
>
> However, when we start in a margin, I
> am not convinced that this is
> actually more readable than the
> alternative. We aren't using our full
> 72 characters here.
>
> For personal projects I tend to relax the column limit to about 100
> chars, which gives nice breathing room and generally reduces the edge
> cases for error strings and so on. (Not suggesting we do that here so
> long as we remain on a mailing-list based workflow.)
>
> I can't say I am a fan of the limit; I don't think it's something I
> can reasonably enforce for python/* so I have some concerns over
> consistency, so I think it'd be easier to just not.
I'm with PEP 8 here: go beyond the line length limits juidicously, not
carelessly.
This cannot be enforced automatically with the tools we have.
> I *did* try, though; I just think it brought up too many judgment
> calls for how to make single-line comments not look super awkward. I
> imagine it'll cause similar delays for other authors, and exasperated
> sighs when the CI fails due to a 73-column comment.
Enforcing a hard 72 limit in CI would be precisely what PEP 8 does not
want us to do.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-08 8:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-25 6:03 [PATCH v4 00/19] qapi: static typing conversion, pt3 John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 01/19] qapi/expr: Comment cleanup John Snow
2021-03-25 15:41 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-25 20:06 ` John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 02/19] flake8: Enforce shorter line length for comments and docstrings John Snow
2021-03-25 15:21 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-25 20:20 ` John Snow
2021-03-26 6:26 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-26 16:30 ` John Snow
2021-03-26 16:44 ` Peter Maydell
2021-04-08 8:32 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-04-08 8:58 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2021-04-09 9:33 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-04-09 17:08 ` John Snow
2021-04-08 8:35 ` Markus Armbruster [this message]
2021-04-16 12:44 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-04-16 20:25 ` John Snow
2021-04-17 10:52 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-04-20 18:06 ` John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 03/19] qapi/expr.py: Remove 'info' argument from nested check_if_str John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 04/19] qapi/expr.py: Check for dict instead of OrderedDict John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 05/19] qapi/expr.py: constrain incoming expression types John Snow
2021-03-25 14:04 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-25 20:48 ` John Snow
2021-03-26 5:40 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-26 17:12 ` John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 06/19] qapi/expr.py: Add assertion for union type 'check_dict' John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 07/19] qapi/expr.py: move string check upwards in check_type John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 08/19] qapi: add tests for invalid 'data' field type John Snow
2021-03-25 14:24 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 09/19] qapi/expr.py: Check type of 'data' member John Snow
2021-03-25 14:26 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-25 21:04 ` John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 10/19] qapi/expr.py: Add casts in a few select cases John Snow
2021-03-25 14:33 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-25 23:32 ` John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 11/19] qapi/expr.py: Modify check_keys to accept any Collection John Snow
2021-03-25 14:45 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-25 23:37 ` John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 12/19] qapi/expr.py: add type hint annotations John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 13/19] qapi/expr.py: Consolidate check_if_str calls in check_if John Snow
2021-03-25 15:15 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-26 0:07 ` John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 14/19] qapi/expr.py: Remove single-letter variable John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 15/19] qapi/expr.py: enable pylint checks John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 16/19] qapi/expr.py: Add docstrings John Snow
2021-04-14 15:04 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-04-17 1:00 ` John Snow
2021-04-17 13:18 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-04-21 1:27 ` John Snow
2021-04-21 13:58 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-04-21 18:20 ` John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 17/19] qapi/expr.py: Use tuples instead of lists for static data John Snow
2021-03-25 15:19 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 18/19] qapi/expr.py: move related checks inside check_xxx functions John Snow
2021-03-25 6:03 ` [PATCH v4 19/19] qapi/expr.py: Use an expression checker dispatch table John Snow
2021-03-25 15:46 ` [PATCH v4 00/19] qapi: static typing conversion, pt3 Markus Armbruster
2021-03-26 0:40 ` John Snow
2021-03-26 18:01 ` 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=87pmz5cgwu.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org \
--to=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=crosa@redhat.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=jsnow@redhat.com \
--cc=michael.roth@amd.com \
--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).