The python black project.

Sean Mooney smooney at redhat.com
Tue Apr 23 14:39:48 UTC 2019


On Tue, 2019-04-23 at 15:29 +0200, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> On 4/19/19 1:05 AM, Monty Taylor wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 4/18/19 7:04 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> > > Quoting Natal Ng├ętal (2019-04-18 01:51:47)
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > 
> > > > Black is project to format Python code. It's more and more used by the python
> > > > community. That can save time and harmonize the code. For example, simple quote
> > > > versus double quote, that was not checked by pep8.i It's just an example of
> > > > what make  black With a pre-hook commit hook this will be also avoid to lose
> > > > time with pep8 errors.
> > > > 
> > > > Two links to see more:
> > > > 
> > > > https://github.com/ambv/black
> > > > https://www.mattlayman.com/blog/2018/python-code-black/
> > > > 
> > > > I think it can be very interesting to start to use Black on OpenStack. What
> > > > do you thinks about that? For example, we can introduce it on some projects, I
> > > > would volunteer to try on TripleO.
> > > 
> > > I've read the arguments in the thread, and I really appreciate
> > > everyone's thoughtfulness here.
> > > 
> > > I just wanted to add that I have been using black for some internal
> > > projects, and it is an absolute joy to forget about code formatting.
> > > This is different than the pep8 checks. The git hook just does it, and
> > > our CI confirms that you do it, and there's no more "oops I forgot
> > > pep8".
> > > 
> > > I believe that the whitespace churn that folks are bringing up is being
> > > overblown. This is a single, automatically produced diff, that while it
> > > might hurt a little in git annotate and conflicts with in-flight patches
> > > now, there is value, and there are mitigations, that make it worth it in
> > > some cases.
> > > 
> > > The main value is that using an automatic formatter will ultimately lead
> > > to less wasted test runs, less wasted developer time, and better diffs
> > > with less conflicts later.
> > > 
> > > So while I appreciate the desire to not rock the boat, it might be that
> > > the boat would go faster after some dead weight is dropped overboard,
> > > and that new energy is applied to forward progress instead of "darn it,
> > > now I have to think about how to fit this into 80 chars and parenthesis
> > > and ..." >
> > > Basically, weigh the one time cost vs. the ongoing savings, rather than
> > > considering them separately.
> > 
> > I think it's useful to point fingers at concrete things if we're going to weigh 
> > costs vs savings.
> > 
> > Here is a patch:
> > 
> > https://review.openstack.org/653876
> > 
> > That runs openstacksdk through black and adds it to the pep8 tox env. I had to 
> > make two manual code changes, and add two pep8 exclusions.
> 
> I quite hate some of the changes it made, e.g. 
> https://review.opendev.org/#/c/653876/1/openstack/baremetal/v1/_proxy.py@296 is 
> a horrible waste of screen space, while 
> https://review.opendev.org/#/c/653876/1/openstack/baremetal/v1/node.py@267 also 
> looks pretty weird to me.

  ya i think i could get more behind autopep8 or yapf.
  running   autopep8  on nova https://review.opendev.org/#/c/655171/ has very little change

  litrally adding 1 empty new line to  to 102 files that 
  with almost 0 other code curn.
  using autopep8 however would fix any actul pep8 issue in new patches automatically
  without the downsides of black.

> 
> > 
> > I also did -l 79 - because it's important.
> > 
> > I'd get so many stackalytics points for the +55540, -39832 :)
> > 
> > Monty
> > 
> 
> 




More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list