What Casey said.
Richard
Posted from my superabacus
On 30/04/2010, at 6:14 AM, Casey Duncan <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Casey Duncan
<[email protected]> wrote:
[..]
I'm +0 on this, it does make the code more pep-8 compliant, so that's
a plus. I could care less about stupid broken tools.
Actually to be more explicit:
I'm -1 on making this change to 1.1, it seems like needless code churn
for nominal gain.
I'm +0 for making this change for 1.2. I can take it or leave it.
-Casey
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "pyglet-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en
.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"pyglet-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en.
