Re: [RFC/PATCH v2] CodingGuidelines: add Python coding guidelines

2013-02-03 Thread Pete Wyckoff
j...@keeping.me.uk wrote on Fri, 01 Feb 2013 11:16 +: > On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 09:39:39AM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote: > > On 01/30/2013 09:31 PM, John Keeping wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:05:10AM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote: > > >> [...] maybe we should establish a small Python

Re: [RFC/PATCH v2] CodingGuidelines: add Python coding guidelines

2013-02-01 Thread John Keeping
On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 09:39:39AM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote: > On 01/30/2013 09:31 PM, John Keeping wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:05:10AM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote: > >> [...] maybe we should establish a small Python library of > >> compatibility utilities (like a small "six"). [..

Re: [RFC/PATCH v2] CodingGuidelines: add Python coding guidelines

2013-02-01 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 01/30/2013 09:31 PM, John Keeping wrote: > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:05:10AM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote: >> [...] maybe we should establish a small Python library of >> compatibility utilities (like a small "six"). [...] >> But I haven't had time to think of where to put such a library, how

Re: [RFC/PATCH v2] CodingGuidelines: add Python coding guidelines

2013-01-30 Thread John Keeping
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:05:10AM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote: > Nit: s/it is supported/it has been supported/ Thanks, I'll fix in the re-roll. > I think this would be a good Python policy. > > I would hate to junk up all Python code with things like > > ' '.encode('ascii') > > though,

Re: [RFC/PATCH v2] CodingGuidelines: add Python coding guidelines

2013-01-30 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 01/29/2013 08:08 PM, John Keeping wrote: > These are kept short by simply deferring to PEP-8. Most of the Python > code in Git is already very close to this style (some things in contrib/ > are not). > > Rationale for version suggestions: > > - Amongst the noise in [1], there isn't any disag

Re: [RFC/PATCH v2] CodingGuidelines: add Python coding guidelines

2013-01-29 Thread John Keeping
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:34:31AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > John Keeping writes: > > > Changes since v1: > > > > - Set 3.1 as the minimum Python 3 version > > > > - Remove the section on Unicode literals - it just adds confusion and > > doesn't apply to the current code; we can deal with

Re: [RFC/PATCH v2] CodingGuidelines: add Python coding guidelines

2013-01-29 Thread Junio C Hamano
John Keeping writes: > Changes since v1: > > - Set 3.1 as the minimum Python 3 version > > - Remove the section on Unicode literals - it just adds confusion and > doesn't apply to the current code; we can deal with any issues if they > ever arise. > ... > + - We use the 'b' prefix for bytes l

[RFC/PATCH v2] CodingGuidelines: add Python coding guidelines

2013-01-29 Thread John Keeping
These are kept short by simply deferring to PEP-8. Most of the Python code in Git is already very close to this style (some things in contrib/ are not). Rationale for version suggestions: - Amongst the noise in [1], there isn't any disagreement about using 2.6 as a base (see also [2]), altho