Actual details on _Black_ compatible configurations for various tools can be found in
[compatible_configs](https://github.com/psf/black/blob/master/docs/compatible_configs.md).
+### Migrating your code style without ruining git blame
+
+A long-standing argument against moving to automated code formatters like _Black_ is
+that the migration will clutter up the output of `git blame`. This was a valid argument,
+but since Git version 2.23, Git natively supports
+[ignoring revisions in blame](https://git-scm.com/docs/git-blame#Documentation/git-blame.txt---ignore-revltrevgt)
+with the `--ignore-rev` option. You can also pass a file listing the revisions to ignore
+using the `--ignore-revs-file` option. The changes made by the revision will be ignored
+when assigning blame. Lines modified by an ignored revision will be blamed on the
+previous revision that modified those lines.
+
+So when migrating your project's code style to _Black_, reformat everything and commit
+the changes (preferably in one massive commit). Then put the full 40 characters commit
+identifier(s) into a file.
+
+```
+# Migrate code style to Black
+5b4ab991dede475d393e9d69ec388fd6bd949699
+```
+
+Afterwards, you can pass that file to `git blame` and see clean and meaningful blame
+information.
+
+```console
+$ git blame important.py --ignore-revs-file .git-blame-ignore-revs
+7a1ae265 (John Smith 2019-04-15 15:55:13 -0400 1) def very_important_function(text, file):
+abdfd8b0 (Alice Doe 2019-09-23 11:39:32 -0400 2) text = text.lstrip()
+7a1ae265 (John Smith 2019-04-15 15:55:13 -0400 3) with open(file, "r+") as f:
+7a1ae265 (John Smith 2019-04-15 15:55:13 -0400 4) f.write(formatted)
+```
+
+You can even configure `git` to automatically ignore revisions listed in a file on every
+call to `git blame`.
+
+```console
+$ git config blame.ignoreRevsFile .git-blame-ignore-revs
+```
+
+**The one caveat is that GitHub and GitLab do not yet support ignoring revisions using
+their native UI of blame.** So blame information will be cluttered with a reformatting
+commit on those platforms. (If you'd like this feature, there's an open issue for
+[GitLab](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/31423) and please let GitHub
+know!)
+
### NOTE: This is a beta product
_Black_ is already [successfully used](#used-by) by many projects, small and big. It
[recommends](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#whitespace-in-expressions-and-statements)
to treat `:` in slices as a binary operator with the lowest priority, and to leave an
equal amount of space on either side, except if a parameter is omitted (e.g.
-`ham[1 + 1 :]`). It also states that for extended slices, both `:` operators have to
-have the same amount of spacing, except if a parameter is omitted (`ham[1 + 1 ::]`).
-_Black_ enforces these rules consistently.
+`ham[1 + 1 :]`). It recommends no spaces around `:` operators for "simple expressions"
+(`ham[lower:upper]`), and extra space for "complex expressions"
+(`ham[lower : upper + offset]`). _Black_ treats anything more than variable names as
+"complex" (`ham[lower : upper + 1]`). It also states that for extended slices, both `:`
+operators have to have the same amount of spacing, except if a parameter is omitted
+(`ham[1 + 1 ::]`). _Black_ enforces these rules consistently.
This behaviour may raise `E203 whitespace before ':'` warnings in style guide
enforcement tools like Flake8. Since `E203` is not PEP 8 compliant, you should tell
projects / etc / vim.git / blobdiff