Fair, but limited to old code, so doesn't apply to instructions for new
code.
I didn't say it does. But it's a standard, one of many.
Then there's string.expandtabs():
expandtabs(...)
S.expandtabs([tabsize]) -> string
Return a copy of S where all tab characters are expanded using
spaces. If tabsize is not given, a tab size of 8 characters is
assumed.
The default for a tab does not imply anything about how python code
should be indented.
But it implies that 8 spaces is a standard.
[snip]
Not python. I think when Bruno says it's *the* standard, we can assume
he means "for python."
When you make an assumption, you make an ASS out of U and MPTION.
*wink*
I didn't think my post was terribly difficult to understand or that it
would be so controversial. It is a simple objective fact that there is no
such "THE" standard, not even for Python. Certainly it is true that 4-
space indents is a very common standard, and that it is recommended by
Guido and required for the standard library, but it is not the only
standard, not even for Python code.
I managed to avoid all the tedious arguments about which braces style
(for C programmers) or BEGIN/END positioning (for Pascal programmers) was
"THE" standard. I would have hoped that in the 21st century we'd got past
that nonsense. By all means argue that interoperability with others is
generally a good thing, and 4-space indents is sufficiently common that
it maximizes your ability to interoperate. You won't get any arguments
from me. (That's why I use 4-space indents, even though they are an
Abomination Unto Nuggan.)
But let's not pretend that Windows is "THE" standard operating system,
vanilla "THE" standard ice cream flavour, and 4-spaces "THE" standard for
indents. If interoperability is not important to you, go right ahead and
use any standard you like, or even pick something non-standard like 17-
space indents. There's no Indent Police who will arrest you for failing
to live up to the standard.