A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-May/099962.html below:

[Python-Dev] Did I miss the decision to untabify all of the C code?

[Python-Dev] Did I miss the decision to untabify all of the C code? [Python-Dev] Did I miss the decision to untabify all of the C code?Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Thu May 6 11:53:55 CEST 2010
Alexandre Vassalotti <alexandre <at> peadrop.com> writes:
> 
> Since 2.7 is likely the last release of the 2.x series, wouldn't it
> more productive to spend time improving it instead of wasting time on
> minor details like indentation?

We occasionally waste time on minor details such as code indentation,
documentation wording and punctuation, distinguishing "built-in" vs "builtin",
etc. :)
I don't think it prevents anyone from doing productive work.
(besides, my own bug queue for 2.x currently appears to be empty)

Then, as pointed out by Victor, if we want to solve the current indentation
mixup, we have to do it in all branches so as to avoid making backports more
difficult.

Regards

Antoine.


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4