on 2014/01/04 00:32, Aline Manera wrote:
On 01/03/2014 04:23 AM, Mark Wu wrote:
Hi Aline,
I would like to start a discussion about the code style for importing modules by this chance.
I saw you and Rodrigo had reorganized the "import" statements(commit 65f6ad3 and e467b32). But personally, I don't agree with the rule you're following. It doesn't comply with PEP8 and bring extra unnecessary rules.
1. Currently, the kimchi imports and external imports are separated. But according to pep8: we still need differentiate the standard library and third-party library. So we just have three groups at most and put a blank line between each groups. [1]
2. For better looking, we can further organize the imports in each group: A. Sort by the import statement: all imports starting with 'import' are put together while all imports starting with 'from' are put together. But we don't need an explicit separating line between them B. Sort by module name following the first word ('import' or 'from')
For this patch, I don't think we need two blank to separate them because they belongs to the same group.
Does it make thanks for you?
As I've already said, we are a different rule from pep8 for imports
We are using the following rule:
Hi Aline. Maybe you did not see my previous reply to Mark's proposal. I listed some reasons to stick to PEP 8 import rules. The problem here is not that we do not know the kimchi rule, but is actually we have different idea on the rule. Would you explain why the current rule is superior to PEP 8? As I wrote, since almost all Python projects comply with PEP, the current rule is very counterintuitive to me (especially the two-blank-line-between-import-section rule). I'd believe this rule would also be strange to other Python developers, and you create extra maintenance effort to reminding and describing the kimchi rule to Pythonic people who already "programmed" themselves to work with PEP. In fact the PEP 8 is more reasonable on the grouping. It differentiate standard lib and third-party lib import. This is very convenience if someone sees a new module to him, and want to lookup documentation. He can just refer to Python official site for standard lib and search on google for third-party lib. Otherwise, he has to read more code to determine if it's an third-party import. The one-blank-line-between-section rule of PEP 8 makes all the import sections compact. We use 2 blank lines between classes because classes are complicated logical entities. However import statements are just listings, they are very simple. Using one blank line is enough and we get compact information. Maybe the current kimchi rule is better in some cases, but the point is that all PEPs are discussed and recognize by lots of Python developers. PEPs are kind of collective intelligence. We should follow PEPs to make our project welcome to the whole Python community, unless we have good enough reason or special enough use case to break it. Here I'm proposing the PEP 8 rule again, while I'm not simply against the current kimchi rule. I'm open to here your considerations. Would you mind explaining your concerns on the current kimchi rule? Why it's good for us? How it's better than PEP 8? Why changing it to PEP 8 is not good for us? Are there some special use case to break PEP 8? What benefit do we get to abandon PEP 8?
import ... import ... import ...
<2 lines>
from ... import ... from ... import ...
<2 lines>
import kimchi... from kimchi import ...
<2 lines>
All those blocks must be in alphabetic order
So, please, organize the imports accordingly to it
Thanks. Mark.
-- Thanks and best regards! Zhou Zheng Sheng / 周征晟 E-mail: zhshzhou@linux.vnet.ibm.com Telephone: 86-10-82454397