[issue12188] PEP 7, C style: add ++ policy and explanation

2011-06-07 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment: Indeed, I don't think that's appropriate. Also, it's not about ++ in general but a particular use of it. -- nosy: +gvanrossum, pitrou resolution: - rejected status: open - pending type: - feature request

[issue12188] PEP 7, C style: add ++ policy and explanation

2011-06-07 Thread Eric V. Smith
Eric V. Smith e...@trueblade.com added the comment: But don't you think we should put information like this somewhere, even if it's not in PEP 7? We've had a discussion about this particular issue (idiomatic pointer increments when appending to a buffer) at least twice, and there's also the

[issue12188] PEP 7, C style: add ++ policy and explanation

2011-06-07 Thread Ezio Melotti
Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com added the comment: If there are a few of these idioms, I'm not against adding a new section to PEP 7 (something like the Programming Recommendations section in the PEP 8). It's just not worth doing it for the *p++ = x; idiom alone IMHO. --

[issue12188] PEP 7, C style: add ++ policy and explanation

2011-06-07 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment: If there are a few of these idioms, I'm not against adding a new section to PEP 7 (something like the Programming Recommendations section in the PEP 8). It's just not worth doing it for the *p++ = x; idiom alone IMHO. If these are

[issue12188] PEP 7, C style: add ++ policy and explanation

2011-05-30 Thread STINNER Victor
Changes by STINNER Victor victor.stin...@haypocalc.com: -- nosy: +haypo ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue12188 ___ ___

[issue12188] PEP 7, C style: add ++ policy and explanation

2011-05-28 Thread Ezio Melotti
Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com added the comment: I'm not sure it's worth adding this to the PEP 7. The PEP is about conventions and style not idioms. PEP 8 has a section about Programming Recommendations that contains a few idioms, but since PEP 7 doesn't have an equivalent section, I

[issue12188] PEP 7, C style: add ++ policy and explanation

2011-05-26 Thread Terry J. Reedy
New submission from Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu: In response to a discussion of a patch removing 'useless' post-increments, (which issue has apparently come up before) Guido posted Sorry to butt in here, but I agree with Eric that it was better before. There is a common idiom, *pointer++

[issue12188] PEP 7, C style: add ++ policy and explanation

2011-05-26 Thread Eric V. Smith
Changes by Eric V. Smith e...@trueblade.com: -- nosy: +eric.smith ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue12188 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list

[issue12188] PEP 7, C style: add ++ policy and explanation

2011-05-26 Thread Eli Bendersky
Changes by Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com: -- nosy: +eli.bendersky ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue12188 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list