On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 15:18:59 -0500, Ed Leafe wrote: > On Jul 29, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Joel Goldstick <joel.goldst...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> Not performance, but human readability > > IMO, this isn't always the case. There are many lines of code that are > broken up to meet the 79 character limit, and as a result become much > less readable.
Speaking of readability, what's with the indentation of your post? The leading tab plays havoc with my newsreader's word-wrapping. Breaking lines to fit in 79 characters should almost always be perfectly readable, if you break it at natural code units rather than at random places. E.g. I have a code snippet that looks like this: [....whatever...] else: completer = completer.Completer( bindings=(r'"\C-xo": overwrite-mode', r'"\C-xd": dump-functions', ) ) I'm not entirely happy with the placement of the closing brackets, but by breaking the line at the arguments to Completer, and then putting one binding per line, I think it is perfectly readable. And much more readable than (say) this: else: completer = completer.Completer(bindings= (r'"\C-xo": overwrite-mode', r'"\C-xd": dump-functions',)) As far as I can tell, that's pretty much the longest line I have in my personal code base, possibly excepting unit tests with long lists of data. I simply don't write deeply nested classes and functions unless I absolutely need to. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list