[Python-Dev] Update PEP 7 to require curly braces in C

[Brett Cannon]

Here is a proposed update:

diff -r 633f51d10a67 pep-0007.txt
--- a/pep-0007.txt Mon Jan 18 10:52:57 2016 -0800
+++ b/pep-0007.txt Tue Jan 19 12:11:44 2016 -0800
@@ -75,9 +75,9 @@
       }

 * Code structure: one space between keywords like ``if``, ``for`` and
-  the following left paren; no spaces inside the paren; braces may be
-  omitted where C permits but when present, they should be formatted
-  as shown::
+  the following left paren; no spaces inside the paren; braces are
+  strongly preferred but may be omitted where C permits, and they
+  should be formatted as shown::

       if (mro != NULL) {
           ...


On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 at 11:37 Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:

> Let's not switch to either of those options. Visually I much prefer either
> of these:
>
> if (test) {
>     blah;
> }
>
> or
>
> if (test)
>     blah;
>
> over the versions with '{ blah; }' (regardless of whether it's on the same
> line as 'if' or on the next line). It looks like the shorter versions are
> mostly used inside macros, where aesthetics usually go out the door anyways
> in favor of robustness.
>
> Since this discussion is never going to end until someone says "enough",
> let me just attempt that (though technically it's Brett's call) -- let's go
> with the strong recommendation to prefer
>
> if (test) {
>     blah;
> }
>
> and stop there.
>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote:
>
>> On 01/19/2016 08:56 AM, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
>>
>> That "otherwise" gets a bit awkward, but I like the idea.  Perhaps
>>> "braces must not be omitted, and should normally be formatted as
>>> follows. ... Where other C styles would permit a braceless one-liner,
>>> the expression and braces may be moved to a single line, as follows: "
>>>
>>>      if (x > 5) { y++ }
>>>
>>> I think that is clearly better, but it may be *too* lightweight for
>>> flow control.
>>>
>>>      if (!obj)
>>>          { return -1; }
>>>
>>> does work for me, and I think the \n{} may actually be useful for
>>> warning that flow control takes a jump.
>>>
>>
>> Either of those two, with preference for the second on multiline ifs,
>> seems quite readable to me.
>>
>> --
>> ~Ethan~
>
>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Python-Dev mailing list
>> Python-Dev at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>>
> Unsubscribe:
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/brett%40python.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20160119/90ca7fd8/attachment.html>