ipython VS yapf

If you’re already using ipython, this isn’t a problem because you’ll already need to download most of these dependencies anyway. But if you’re not using ipython… you’ll still need to download those dependencies.

!pip install is error-prone, it is better to use %pip install, ipython even warns about this, https://github.com/ipython/ipython/pull/12954/

The git history (here is the git blame) shows it has not been updated in 9 year. Looks like a documentation issue that you should open an issue against.

Do you know IPython? It is a modern Python console that extends the capabilities of the classic builtin Python shell by offering introspection, tab completion, syntaxing coloring, as well as history. If you don't know it, I can't recommend it enough. More information can be found in its GitHub page.

There is an IPython ticket on GitHub on the topic, but it's unclear if the problem has been solved.

For further documentation on ipython using the CLI, you can refer to the GitHub link or the documentation page.

> ??????_ Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/nvaughn4/bin/miniconda3/envs/newprime/bin/ipython", line 11, in sys.exit(start_ipython()) File "/home/nvaughn4/bin/miniconda3/envs/newprime/lib/python3.6/site-packages/IPython/__init__.py", line 126, in start_ipython return launch_new_instance(argv=argv, **kwargs) File "/home/nvaughn4/bin/miniconda3/envs/newprime/lib/python3.6/site-packages/traitlets/config/application.py", line 658, in launch_instance app.start() File "/home/nvaughn4/bin/miniconda3/envs/newprime/lib/python3.6/site-packages/IPython/terminal/ipapp.py", line 356, in start self.shell.mainloop() File "/home/nvaughn4/bin/miniconda3/envs/newprime/lib/python3.6/site-packages/IPython/terminal/interactiveshell.py", line 563, in mainloop self.interact() File "/home/nvaughn4/bin/miniconda3/envs/newprime/lib/python3.6/site-packages/IPython/terminal/interactiveshell.py", line 554, in interact self.run_cell(code, store_history=True) File "/home/nvaughn4/bin/miniconda3/envs/newprime/lib/python3.6/site-packages/IPython/core/interactiveshell.py", line 2858, in run_cell raw_cell, store_history, silent, shell_futures) File "/home/nvaughn4/bin/miniconda3/envs/newprime/lib/python3.6/site-packages/IPython/core/interactiveshell.py", line 2880, in _run_cell elif self.should_run_async(raw_cell): File "/home/nvaughn4/bin/miniconda3/envs/newprime/lib/python3.6/site-packages/IPython/core/interactiveshell.py", line 2918, in should_run_async return _should_be_async(cell) File "/home/nvaughn4/bin/miniconda3/envs/newprime/lib/python3.6/site-packages/IPython/core/async_helpers.py", line 161, in _should_be_async code = compile(cell, "<>", "exec") UnicodeEncodeError: 'utf-8' codec can't encode characters in position 537-542: surrogates not allowed If you suspect this is an IPython 7.15.0 bug, please report it at: https://github.com/ipython/ipython/issues or send an email to the mailing list at [email protected] You can print a more detailed traceback right now with "%tb", or use "%debug" to interactively debug it. Extra-detailed tracebacks for bug-reporting purposes can be enabled via: %config Application.verbose_crash=True sys:1: RuntimeWarning: coroutine 'InteractiveShell.run_cell_async' was never awaited

There’s one I’ve come across recently here where you’re fighting against syntax highlighting with extra error context. https://github.com/ipython/ipython/issues/13446#issuecomment...

I see. https://github.com/ipython/ipython/issues/13529

You can automate setup for developers using this simple script:

https://github.com/ipython/ipython/pull/12091/files

And here’s a GitLab issue requesting support for blame-ignore:

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/31423

I don’t think there’s a corresponding GitHub request, but maybe if GitLab adds this feature GitHub will have some incentive to follow suit.

YAPF (Yet Another Python Formatter): YAPF takes a different approach in that it’s based off of ‘clang-format’, a popular formatter for C++ code. YAPF reformats Python code so that it conforms to the style guide and looks good.

I think I agree about the testing and labor of complicated translation rules.

But it doesn't appear that almost every pretty printer uses the Wadler pretty printing paper. It seems like MOST of them don't?

e.g. clang-format is one of the biggest and best, and it has a model that includes "unwrapped lines", a "layouter", a line break cost function, exhaustive search with memoization, and Dijikstra's algorithm:

https://llvm.org/devmtg/2013-04/jasper-slides.pdf

The YAPF Python formatter is based on this same algorithm - https://github.com/google/yapf

The Dart formatter used a model of "chunks, rules, and spans"

https://journal.stuffwithstuff.com/2015/09/08/the-hardest-pr...

It almost seems like there are 2 camps -- the functional algorithms for functional/expression-based languages, and other algorithms for more statement-based languages.

Though I guess Prettier/JavaScript falls on the functional side.

I just ran across this survey on lobste.rs and it seems to cover the functional pretty printing languages influenced by Wadler, but functional style, but not the other kind of formatter ("Google" formatters perhaps)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.01530.pdf

To get all your code into a consistent format the next step is to run a formatter. I recommend black, the well-known uncompromising code formatter, which is the most popular choice. Alternatives to black are autoflake, prettier and yapf, if you do not agree with blacks constraints.

Use yapf to format code -> https://github.com/google/yapf

Google is surprisingly rigorous when it comes to code formatting. I have been a software engineer at Amazon and it was nothing like what the book says happens at Google. So the conventions you see for python docstring formatting are primarily designed to integrate with Google's internal tooling. By using docstrings following the Google conventions, you will ultimately end up with automated documentation and other fancy automated things (like type checking which they did in the docstring before there were type hints). Also notably, Google has an open source python formatting tool that they use internally called YAPF (which stands for "Yet Another Python Formatter". So if you really want to go all-in on Google python style, grab that, too.

https://github.com/google/yapf has configs, do ctrl+f SPLIT_COMPLEX_COMPREHENSION in the readme

Only as recommendation: If the lines of the source code (here: you C code you aim to document) are kept short, in manageable bytes (similar to entries parser.add_argument in Clark's "Tiny Python Projects", example seldomly pass beyond the frequently recommended threshold of 80 characters/line), reporting with listings becomes easier (equally, the reading of the difference logs/views by git and vimdiff), than with lines of say 120 characters per line. Though we no longer are constrained to 80 characters per line by terminals/screens and punch cards (when Fortran still was FORTRAN), this is a reason e.g., yapf for Python allows you to choose between 4 spaces/indentation (PEP8 style), or 2 spaces/indentation (Google style).

There is also a formatter for Python files called yapf that your team can use to avoid arguing over formatting conventions. Plus, Google also provides a settings file for Vim, noting that the default settings should be enough if you're using Emacs.