Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by innocentoldguy 3134 days ago
“I broke this rule because I developed some of the code while I was a Visiting Scientist at Google, so I followed the Google style guide, which deviates from PEP 8 in a few places. Once I got used to Google style, I found that I liked it. And at this point, it would be too much trouble to change.”

Why would you write a book that targets the Python community and ignore PEP8 styling, inconveniencing an entire community, simply because it would be too much trouble for you to change?

“Also on the topic of style, I write “Bayes’s theorem” with an s after the apostrophe, which is preferred in some style guides and deprecated in others.”

It is deprecated in all modern style guides and should not be used. You’ll get dinged in college English and writing classes for using this outdated and redundant style.

I’m sure this book is great, but, as a point of constructive criticism, I would suggest the author do a better job at adhering to the styles of code and English expected by his target audience, rather than what is comfortable for him.

3 comments

From the PEP8 style guide:

"Many projects have their own coding style guidelines. In the event of any conflicts, such project-specific guides take precedence for that project."

and

"A Foolish Consistency is the Hobgoblin of Little Minds".

And, throughout, PEP8 makes it clear that it is a set of recommendations, and that if a project or community already has an established style, it need not be changed.

You misunderstand. I’m not criticizing Google not following PEP8. They’re welcome to make whatever modifications they want. I do the same. For example, I don’t like having two blank lines between methods and I don’t limit my line widths to 80 characters. This personal or project level alteration is fine. However, when your target audience is the Python community at large, you are better off following the PEP8 standard, which everyone knows and is comfortable with, rather that a project specific format, just because you personally find it more convenient. Standards are pretty important in the publishing industry, so I’m not sure why this is so controversial here today.
Why are you arguing against PEP8? As you mentioned in your final sentence, the Python community DOES have an established standard. It is called PEP8. The parent has made a valid point. Why would you criticize or trash his "karma" for stating it?
You say I'm arguing against PEP8 by quoting PEP8? That's hard to understand. Whose karma am I "trashing", and how? I certainly didn't downvote him, if that's what you mean.
Others have already made the point about PEP8 being a guideline, so I just wanted to also point out that not all style guides would agress with you on Bayes'/'s theorem. Case in point, the APA style guide: http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2013/06/forming-possessive...
I'm not sure why you were down-voted. This is a valid point and as a college professor and author, I'm sure Downey would appreciate any feedback that would make his book better.