Re: [Zope3-dev] Should major for-reaching changes be made for purposes of style?
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-8-31 17:05 -0400: > ... >I'm interested in hearing what people think about this in general. >Should we make far reaching code changes to enforce a consistent >style? Or should we update style when making other changes? >I tend to do the later. I think that the developers of Python >prefer that changes like this be made more gradually. They've >been burned by mass changes in the past. > >Thoughts? I am not very concerned about style (in foreign code). Well chosen "speaking" names are much more important than style aspects. Consequently, I would make style changes gradually (if at all). -- Dieter ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Should major for-reaching changes be made for purposes of style?
On Wednesday 31 August 2005 17:05, Jim Fulton wrote: > I'm interested in hearing what people think about this in general. > Should we make far reaching code changes to enforce a consistent > style? Or should we update style when making other changes? > I tend to do the later. I think this depends on the case. For example, when we decided to switch to doctests, we did not simply rewrite all tests; and this is fine, because we did not have the resources. For a change like Martijn's I think a massive redoing was okay. Style is very high on my importance list. It gives new developers an easier lead in. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Should major for-reaching changes be made for purposes of style?
Jim Fulton wrote: A change in style, if applied everywhere can lead to massive code changes. This can have serious downsides. If people are working on branches, where most new work should be done, then merging is made more difficult. People who read the checkins have a lot of extra code to review for a small benefit. (I don't read the checkins regularly myself and really *really* *REALLY* appreciate the efforts of folks that do and don't want to make their job harder.) OTOH, consistent style is beneficial. :) I'm interested in hearing what people think about this in general. Should we make far reaching code changes to enforce a consistent style? Or should we update style when making other changes? I tend to do the later. I think that the developers of Python prefer that changes like this be made more gradually. They've been burned by mass changes in the past. Thoughts? Consistent style is very important and IMO it's great that some code-cleaner look after 'none-stylish' code. It might just a problem of timing that code-refactorer and code-cleaner don't hurts each other. Perhaps we just have to separate cleaning and merging periods more explicitly. Regards, Dominik ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Should major for-reaching changes be made for purposes of style?
A change in style, if applied everywhere can lead to massive
code changes. This can have serious downsides. If people
are working on branches, where most new work should be done,
then merging is made more difficult. People who read the checkins
have a lot of extra code to review for a small benefit.
(I don't read the checkins regularly myself and really *really*
*REALLY* appreciate the efforts of folks that do and don't
want to make their job harder.)
OTOH, consistent style is beneficial. :)
I'm interested in hearing what people think about this in general.
Should we make far reaching code changes to enforce a consistent
style? Or should we update style when making other changes?
I tend to do the later. I think that the developers of Python
prefer that changes like this be made more gradually. They've
been burned by mass changes in the past.
Thoughts?
Jim
Martijn Pieters wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Now that our dear BDFL has expressed the opinion that exceptions raising
of the form:
raise FooException, "Bar"
is definitely passé and so 20th century[1], and now that the holy writ of
PEP 8[2] has been updated to reflect the current view that all exception
raising incantations should be expressed as:
raise FooException("Bar")
would people object if I convert such expressions in violation of this
view to the One True Way? (At least in src/zope as much such mistakes in
other code may be blamed on infidels more easily).
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
