Indent testers needed (Prothon)

[rzed]

"Mark Hahn" <mark at prothon.org> wrote in
news:2Msbc.136673$cx5.2385 at fed1read04: 

> "rzed" <rzantow at ntelos.net> wrote
> 
>> /* loop 2 */
>> ix = 2
>> for
>>   item
>>     in
>>       blist
>>         :
>>           alist[ix] =
>>                alist[
>>           ix
>>           ]
> 
> Do you think this is a good thing or a bad thing?  You could do
> the same thing or worse in C or Java.
> 
> 

My first reaction was negative, but in fact I don't think it makes 
as much difference as it appears to. I'm not going to code like 
that, and I don't know anyone who will. But the absurdist approach 
to coding won't necessarily be used just because is possible. The 
continuation lines in general are more convenient than Python's 
stricter rule, though I liked the first version of Prothon's rule 
(a double indent implies continuation) as well. The open-bracket 
rule in particular seems intuitive. I think either Prothon rule is 
handier than \
continuations.

But I agree with Josiah, in that cut and paste will become 
problematic if the mixture is not allowed. I tried to make the 
point to Michael earlier (though apparently in a muddled way). I 
don't show visible tab marks in my editors, and I don't want to 
have to, but if I don't, I haven't any good way to know whether a 
piece of code contains tabs or spaces. Until I run it, at least. 

-- 
rzed