Re: Revert 165f44aa?

2013-09-22 Thread Claude Paroz
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

Re: Revert 165f44aa?

2013-09-22 Thread Aymeric Augustin
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

Re: Revert 165f44aa?

2013-09-22 Thread Aymeric Augustin
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

Re: Revert 165f44aa?

2013-09-21 Thread Russell Keith-Magee
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

Re: Revert 165f44aa?

2013-09-21 Thread Kevin Christopher Henry
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,

Re: Revert 165f44aa?

2013-09-21 Thread Florian Apolloner
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.

Re: Revert 165f44aa?

2013-09-21 Thread Marc Tamlyn
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: >

Revert 165f44aa?

2013-09-21 Thread Aymeric Augustin
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