Hello!

Thanks a lot for this! I had no idea that they had changed the relevant
PEPs to account
for this, but as mentioned it is still a good idea to have the option to
change this depending
on your preference. And as far as I have been able to tell from coding with
this patch for a
few hours, it seems to work beautifully and I would love to see this as an
official feature!

Best regards,
Gustaf

Den sön 9 apr. 2023 kl 14:11 skrev kobarity <kobarity@gmail.com>:

>
> Gustaf Waldemarson wrote:
> > One noticeable caveat is that **any** parenthesis can now be additionally
> > indented, e.g., the follow is now also possible:
> >
> >     this_is_a_tuple = (long_variable_name_here,
> >                                       also_a_long_variable_name)
> >
> > Although, given that this can be cycled at will by the user, I'm not
> sure if it
> > is a bad additional feature or not.
> >
> > Ideally, I suppose that `python-indent-context` could be modified to add
> a
> > `:inside-cond-paren` symbol that signals that the parenthesis is for a
> > conditional expression and thus the extra indentation should be applied,
> and not
> > in any other case. That does seem a bit harder for me to fix at a
> cursory glance
> > however, so maybe this fix is enough?
>
> Hi Gustaf,
>
> I agree with you in that it's better to have a new indent context, and
> I tried to implement it.
>
> At first, I thought that it would be enough to add a counterpart of
> the user option `python-indent-def-block-scale' and corresponding
> `:inside-paren-newline-start-from-block' context.
> `python-indent-def-block-scale' can be used to customize the following
> code
>
> #+begin_src python
> if (
>         "VALUE" in my_unnecessarily_long_dictionary
>         and some_other_long_condition_case
>         ):
>     do_something()
> #+end_src
>
> to be indented as follows (with a TAB at "):" line):
>
> #+begin_src python
> if (
>     "VALUE" in my_unnecessarily_long_dictionary
>     and some_other_long_condition_case
> ):
>     do_something()
> #+end_src
>
> This is the style used by the popular formatter "black".
>
> From the name `python-indent-def-block-scale' and its docstring, it is
> easy to assume that it only works for def block, but in fact it works
> for every blocks.  As `python-indent-def-block-scale' works only when
> there is no item on the same line following the opening paren, I tried
> to add a similar user option and an indent context for the opening
> paren followed by some items on the same line.  It could indent as
> follows:
>
> #+begin_src python
> if ("VALUE" in my_unnecessarily_long_dictionary
>         and some_other_long_condition_case):
>     do_something()
> #+end_src
>
> However, it could not handle correctly the following example:
>
> #+begin_src python
> elif (some_case or
>           another_case):
>     do_another()
> #+end_src
>
> The extra indentation is not needed here.
>
> So I think it is best to increase the indentation only if the
> calculated indentation equals to the indentation of the contents of
> the block ("do_something()" in the above example).  This is similar to
> the way I fixed Bug#57262.
>
> Unlike Bug#57262, the current indentation shown below is not a
> violation of the latest PEP8:
>
> #+begin_src python
> if ("VALUE" in my_unnecessarily_long_dictionary
>     and some_other_long_condition_case):
>     do_something()
> #+end_src
>
> Although pycodestyle reports E129 "visually indented line with same
> indent as next logical line," PEP8 was changed to allow this.  This is
> explained in the following issue, for example:
> https://github.com/PyCQA/pycodestyle/issues/474
>
> So changing this indentation should be a user option.  Attached is my
> implementation of this.  The user option
> `python-indent-block-paren-deeper' is added to customize this
> indentation.  I would be glad if you could try it.
>