Just so you can laugh at me. Hahaha. That's the one thing I really do like about python. It means any difference in the shape of python code tells you something

Just so you can laugh at me. Hahaha. That's the one thing I really do like about python. It means any difference in the shape of python code tells you something other than a personal preference of a coder I shouldn't have to know or care about. The consistency of the signal you get from the shape of the code makes this signal useful across codebases. That signal has a lot more noise in it in C & Perl for example. Anyone who talks about automatic indent compensating for it has never worked with jerks using different styles or hasn't had to hack a 3rd party library source to find a bug. No really. Make clang tools will be better but that's a long bow to assume yet. I have never once ever under any circumstances had a goddamn meeting where people argued about python bracing rules for code consistency. That alone makes it a truly epic ultra-megawin, for mine. (*but they absolutely should have standardised on ONE of tabs or spaces and I hate not being able to bounce on the braces to see where that awful code's scope actually starts and who wrote this anyway sweary curse I'm a teapot...).