From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26273C433ED for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 08:37:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A657661004 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 08:37:02 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A657661004 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:59398 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUQ9t-0007Bf-Km for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 04:37:01 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44914) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUQ8w-0006fG-7R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 04:36:02 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:51548) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUQ8u-0002Qq-3r for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 04:36:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1617870959; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=G4A8zSuWMdk2/gJkln20erA5ZJkYqWuMPwPmydH9vK8=; b=The0I9ElHcYmRMeh+mOUVLy9nrYKDjghHTsvy4yF9+ZYh3tK+/95lI7fWLLU4O4SCV17Fs 7caxA+MlHT5vJfWRQ/HwLfOhX3lPx81fb+7Ml5DAcNYvoYrUetSRf7sv6xV6wskqRK4MY4 sWRPJMYLQjhPmD1K3HoY+8i8RX90hNs= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-391-qxDDbXH9P7yOmOBo8t5OgQ-1; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 04:35:48 -0400 X-MC-Unique: qxDDbXH9P7yOmOBo8t5OgQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40C5318B9F84; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 08:35:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (ovpn-114-17.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.114.17]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A5E719D9F; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 08:35:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7D11C113865F; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 10:35:45 +0200 (CEST) From: Markus Armbruster To: John Snow Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/19] flake8: Enforce shorter line length for comments and docstrings References: <20210325060356.4040114-1-jsnow@redhat.com> <20210325060356.4040114-3-jsnow@redhat.com> <877dlvs1gp.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <871rc277mm.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <33866c5d-1eab-739c-f2e8-a35f4a0b0f55@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 10:35:45 +0200 In-Reply-To: <33866c5d-1eab-739c-f2e8-a35f4a0b0f55@redhat.com> (John Snow's message of "Fri, 26 Mar 2021 12:30:37 -0400") Message-ID: <87pmz5cgwu.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=armbru@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Michael Roth , Cleber Rosa , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Eduardo Habkost Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" John Snow writes: > On 3/26/21 2:26 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> John Snow writes: >> >>> On 3/25/21 11:21 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>>> John Snow 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 >>>> >>>> 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.