On 25 Aug 2007, at 19:01 , Jim Fulton wrote:
On Aug 23, 2007, at 8:37 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
We have 100+ packages that make up what used to be distributed as
"Zope3". We have numerous more packages in svn.zope.org. Most of
them are developed, released and distributed individu
On Aug 23, 2007, at 8:37 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
We have 100+ packages that make up what used to be distributed as
"Zope3". We have numerous more packages in svn.zope.org. Most of
them are developed, released and distributed individually. We like
to think this is a good thing
Am Sonntag, den 26.08.2007, 21:52 +0200 schrieb Christian Theune:
> Am Samstag, den 25.08.2007, 17:57 -0400 schrieb Zvezdan Petkovic:
> > Obviously, a visual perception differs from person to person. If a
> > person has a difficulty reading getMainType(), they should not be
> > forced to write g
Am Samstag, den 25.08.2007, 17:57 -0400 schrieb Zvezdan Petkovic:
> Obviously, a visual perception differs from person to person. If a
> person has a difficulty reading getMainType(), they should not be
> forced to write get_main_type() in their Zope code for the sake of
> consistency which is
On Saturday 25 August 2007 09:48, Benji York wrote:
> Andreas Jung wrote:
> > Can someone please point out the major differences concerning
> > Python code between PEP 8 and the Zope 3 style guide?
>
> The primary differences are in method, attribute, function, and
> variable names. PEP 8 specifie
On Saturday 25 August 2007 06:31, Dieter Maurer wrote:
> I do not see lots of underscore rules, maybe because I disregard PEP
> 8... For me, the Java style ("getMainType") is easier readable than
> the one prefered in the Python runtime library ("get_main_type").
Some people feel that theyCannotRe
Andreas Jung wrote:
Can someone please point out the major differences concerning Python code
between PEP 8 and the Zope 3 style guide?
The primary differences are in method, attribute, function, and variable
names. PEP 8 specifies lower_case_with_underscores.
Zope 3, more often than not (a
--On 25. August 2007 08:51:44 -0400 Benji York <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Fred Drake wrote:
On 8/24/07, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But if you prefer consistency, then we really should be staying with
the Zope 3 style guide,
This, of course, all depends on the answer to the
Fred Drake wrote:
On 8/24/07, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But if you prefer consistency, then we really should be staying with the Zope
3 style guide,
This, of course, all depends on the answer to the question:
Consistency with what? Zope 3 history? The larger Python community
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2007-8-24 20:24 +0200:
> ...
>I wonder how you can like this language with significant whitespaces
>and lots of underscore rules then :).
In fact, I dislike Python's grouping by indentation (especially how
it is implemented in the interactive interpreter) and
a
Andreas Jung wrote at 2007-8-24 21:01 +0200:
> ...
>ACK on everything of that. But reading code comes before understanding code.
>And the visual impression of code has a strong impact on how we read code
>and on how we understand code.
True, but do you really read code to satisfy an esthetical ne
--On 24. August 2007 19:55:35 +0200 Dieter Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote at 2007-8-24 19:35 +0200:
...
Whitespace rules have a major impact on the readability of code.
Readability is a major point when we talk of code quality. Readable code
does not make code automati
On 8/24/07, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it's a matter of taste and that's hard to argue about.
No, that's easy to argue about, it's just not productive. That's the
problem. :-)
-Fred
--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.
"Chaos is the score upon which reality is written." --
On 24 Aug 2007, at 19:55 , Dieter Maurer wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote at 2007-8-24 19:35 +0200:
...
Whitespace rules have a major impact on the readability of code.
Readability is a major point when we talk of code quality.
Readable code
does not make code automatically but good code has to be r
On 24 Aug 2007, at 18:55 , Fred Drake wrote:
On 8/24/07, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That's not harsh. That's the point of a coding style. :-) The long-
term
benefits are greater.
Agreed!
Ok, then we're on the same page.
But if you prefer consistency, then we really should b
On 24 Aug 2007, at 19:27 , Dieter Maurer wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2007-8-24 15:34 +0200:
...
This and other aspects are things I don't particularly love about
PEP8 either, but I value consistency over my personal preferences.
I do honor other people's
decisions though, and wou
Andreas Jung wrote at 2007-8-24 19:35 +0200:
> ...
>Whitespace rules have a major impact on the readability of code.
>Readability is a major point when we talk of code quality. Readable code
>does not make code automatically but good code has to be readable.
Lots of whitespace does not make the c
--On 24. August 2007 19:27:23 +0200 Dieter Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I find it very stupid to prescribe whilespace rules and
Whitespace rules have a major impact on the readability of code.
Readability is a major point when we talk of code quality. Readable code
does not make code
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2007-8-24 15:34 +0200:
> ...
>This and other aspects are things I don't particularly love about
>PEP8 either, but I value consistency over my personal preferences.
>
>> I do honor other people's
>> decisions though, and would always follow the original author's
On 8/24/07, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> He he, except that the ``zc`` namespace started using PEP 8. ;-) I am pretty
> sure the vast majority of code in the repos is classic Zope 3. ``zope``,
> ``z3c`` (for most parts), and ``lovely`` all follow Zope 3.
Even worse, the ``zc`` name
On Friday 24 August 2007 12:55, Fred Drake wrote:
> I don't really care whether the style is the "classic" Zope 3 style or
> PEP 8, as long as it never changes.
He he, except that the ``zc`` namespace started using PEP 8. ;-) I am pretty
sure the vast majority of code in the repos is classic Zope
On Friday 24 August 2007 12:59, Fred Drake wrote:
> > But let's be pragmatic at some point...
>
> Right. Adopt *one* style, due to the long-term benefits, and don't change
> it.
I totally agree. It was the main reason for the original style guide for Zope
3; but you both were around when we work
On 8/24/07, Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My statement was focused on discussions like camel case vs. underscores.
> Such discussions are basically academic.
Agreed.
> In real life when you develop
> software for different companies or projects it is hard to switch your
> personal cod
On 8/24/07, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's not harsh. That's the point of a coding style. :-) The long-term
> benefits are greater.
Agreed!
> But if you prefer consistency, then we really should be staying with the Zope
> 3 style guide,
This, of course, all depends on the an
--On 24. August 2007 12:21:24 -0400 Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/24/07, Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We should not be too pendantic when it comes to coding styles. I assume
that most contributors to Zope 3 or Zope components know how to write
code the Zope 3 way.
As
On Friday 24 August 2007 12:21, Fred Drake wrote:
> I don't think that's what this is. This is a document describing how
> things /are/ done in the Zope 3 repository. That's helpful both as it
> stands and as a foundation for a document on how things should be
> going forward.
>
> This has nothin
On 8/24/07, Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We should not be too pendantic when it comes to coding styles. I assume
> that most contributors to Zope 3 or Zope components know how to write code
> the Zope 3 way.
As the community grows, this is an increasingly poor assumption.
Different de
--On 24. August 2007 09:25:14 -0400 Stephan Richter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thursday 23 August 2007 20:37, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
I would like to get your comments on it. No matter what this evolves to,
I wouldn't mind eventually seeing it set in stone with your blessings,
s
On Friday 24 August 2007 09:34, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Well, this may sound harsh, but I see some appeal in actually forcing
> a particular coding-style on everybody.
That's not harsh. That's the point of a coding style. :-) The long-term
benefits are greater.
> It's soo late for a
On 24 Aug 2007, at 15:25 , Stephan Richter wrote:
On Thursday 23 August 2007 20:37, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
I would like to get your comments on it. No matter what this
evolves to,
I wouldn't mind eventually seeing it set in stone with your
blessings,
so that the checkin police can
On Thursday 23 August 2007 20:37, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> I would like to get your comments on it. No matter what this evolves to,
> I wouldn't mind eventually seeing it set in stone with your blessings,
> so that the checkin police can use it as the highway code to issue
> tickets to an
On 24 Aug 2007, at 07:05 , Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 24. August 2007 02:37:01 +0200 Philipp von Weitershausen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://svn.zope.org/*checkout*/Sandbox/philikon/foundation/
maintaining-so
ftware.txt
Thanks for writing this excellent "guide". However I am personally
--On 24. August 2007 02:37:01 +0200 Philipp von Weitershausen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://svn.zope.org/*checkout*/Sandbox/philikon/foundation/maintaining-so
ftware.txt
Thanks for writing this excellent "guide". However I am personally unclear
about specifying the dependencies and
We have 100+ packages that make up what used to be distributed as
"Zope3". We have numerous more packages in svn.zope.org. Most of them
are developed, released and distributed individually. We like to think
this is a good thing (I certainly do). But currently we have a bit of a
chaos [2]. It's
34 matches
Mail list logo
