Le dimanche 22 septembre 2013 14:24:20 UTC+2, Aymeric Augustin a écrit :
>
> I reverse-applied 165f44aa and committed a subset of the changes.
>
I'm fine with these changes. Thanks for your work.
Claude
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django
I reverse-applied 165f44aa and committed a subset of the changes.
For the record, here are the changes I did *not* commit.
--
Aymeric.
On 22 sept. 2013, at 09:09, Aymeric Augustin
wrote:
> Thanks everyone for your feedback.
>
> We have a clear consensus
Thanks everyone for your feedback.
We have a clear consensus for not merging consecutive `with` statements, except
in simple cases such as Russell's example.
I'll review each chunk of the patch and perform a partial revert.
--
Aymeric.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Florian Apolloner wrote:
>
>
> On Saturday, September 21, 2013 7:50:34 PM UTC+2, Aymeric Augustin wrote:
>>
>> But whenever the with statement spills over two lines, which happens in a
>> majority of cases, I find it worse than two with
To summarize the possible approaches here:
1) Combine multiple with statements into one wherever possible. This seems
to be the approach of the commit in question.
2) Group with statements based on whether they logically belong together,
regardless of line length. This will involve backslashes,
On Saturday, September 21, 2013 7:50:34 PM UTC+2, Aymeric Augustin wrote:
>
> But whenever the with statement spills over two lines, which happens in a
> majority of cases, I find it worse than two with statements. It's
> especially bad in the transactions tests — I worked in this area today.
Burn the backslashes!
On a more serious note, I think these need to be taken on a case by case
basis. Certainly unhelpful it test code though.
On 21 Sep 2013 18:50, "Aymeric Augustin"
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I think we went overboard in this commit:
>
Hello,
I think we went overboard in this commit:
https://github.com/django/django/commit/165f44aa
Specifically, I consider it's a regression in three areas.
1) Readability
After the patch, indentation no longer matches the logical structure of the
program. For example:
-with