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=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 ABFBCC433B4 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 06:09:21 +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 61CE461177 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 06:09:21 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 61CE461177 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]:37854 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lbGuO-0006ch-Gi for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 02:09:20 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40032) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lbGsf-0004xi-BM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 02:07:33 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:24016) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lbGsc-0001oQ-HD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 02:07:32 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1619503648; 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=eG4o3S/RQr+VUMe9GzV2EZ4XoZGOSwN4JqC85zb6NnY=; b=OMCfmWfIvwRDFsLvlLQCZhjZKIxY1RVapm5xFG7TY5WjISQJaqRsRI+K1p5f8s4vMAgAEY +g5RnEcVd5hdAfda4AA9KURUV5Bhj2W8/WLkUs3IJer93CTU7LnnV4/4Mikk63OIeN3u/j Jiv+AQuzKTZhJzLyo049T2I8Hs5CEsM= 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-142-NN1EcylHM4moaY6crjITEg-1; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 02:07:26 -0400 X-MC-Unique: NN1EcylHM4moaY6crjITEg-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 BF8E41006CAD; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 06:07:25 +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 8948A2AABD; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 06:07:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 135E8113525D; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 08:07:24 +0200 (CEST) From: Markus Armbruster To: John Snow Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/22] qapi/source: Remove line number from QAPISourceInfo initializer References: <20210422030720.3685766-1-jsnow@redhat.com> <20210422030720.3685766-4-jsnow@redhat.com> <87o8e49oha.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 08:07:24 +0200 In-Reply-To: (John Snow's message of "Mon, 26 Apr 2021 19:14:34 -0400") Message-ID: <87zgxk6z1f.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=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -29 X-Spam_score: -3.0 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.219, 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 4/24/21 2:38 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Mixing f-string and % interpolation. I doubt we'd write it this way >> from scratch. I recommend to either stick to % for now (leave >> conversion to f-strings for later), or conver the column formatting, >> too, even though it's not related to the patch's purpose. > > True. Two thoughts: > > 1. I don't like using % formatting because it behaves differently from > .format() and f-strings. My overwhelming desire is to never use it for > this reason. > > Example: {foo} will call foo's __format__ method, whereas "%s" % foo > will simply add str(foo). They are not always the same, not even for > built-in Python objects. I only care for readability, which profits from local consistency. Maybe I'll sing a different tune once I got actually bitten by the difference between interpolation and f-strings. > 2. Cleaning up the formatting here without cleaning it up everywhere > is a great way to get the patch NACKed. You have in the past been > fairly reluctant to "While we're here" cleanups, so I am trying to cut > back on them. Yes, I've been pushing back on such cleanups. But it's really a case-by-case issue. When a patch fits on a page, squashing in a bit of losely related cleanup is usually fine. When it's long, keep it focused on a single purpose. > This is why my habit for f-strings keeps trickling in: whenever I have > to rewrite any interpolation, I reach for the one that behaves most > idiomatically for Python 3. I am trying to balance that against churn > that's not in the stated goals of the patch. > > In this case: I'll clean the rest of the method to match; and add a > note to the commit message that explains why. Okay. > I will get around to > removing all of the f-strings, The opposite, I presume. > but I want to hit the clean linter > baseline first to help guide the testing for such a series. I regret > the awkward transitional period. I'd leave converting interpolation to f-strings for later. I can tolerate early, partial conversion, since I trust complete conversion will happen, and as long as the resulting local inconsistency isn't too grating. Subjective, I know.