Add guideline for ignored values

[vladimir-v-diaz]

No description provided.

[awwad]

Would you say that i is permissible for an unused iterator? This example might imply to people that it's not.

[awwad]

This is for pylint rules, I guess? Seems like a sensible recommendation, though I think I might add a few words on why. Something like "In order to make clear to the reader that a variable is not used...", or even just "for readability".

[vladimir-v-diaz]

Would you say that i is permissible for an unused iterator?

By convention, i, j, k, and _, are often used in this case. Although Pylint follows the i, j, k, _ convention, Justin recommended we use junk in instances where a returned value is unused.

In the guideline, I say: "The variable name junk should be used in cases where a returned valued must be stored but the variable itself is unneeded." Is this not clear enough? Should I justify why we recommend junk over the i, j, k, _ convention?

[awwad]

I think an explanation would probably be good for why this guideline exists, yes.

I think that using "junk" where a returned value is unused makes sense, yes (example 2). I'm not sure I agree on the iterators (example 1), though.

[vladimir-v-diaz]

@JustinCappos Are you okay with allowing i, j, or k for iterators?

[JustinCappos]

For iterators, i, j, and k are fine by me. I would prefer 'junk' is used if the iterator is unused though.

…

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Vladimir Diaz ***@***.***> wrote: @JustinCappos <https://github.com/justincappos> Are you okay with allowing i, j, or k for iterators? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#17 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA0XDwY9vcmI5ljZyICJc1nHaIlW7w_zks5s6zKAgaJpZM4QsVPl> .

[vladimir-v-diaz]

Okay, I added more examples and an explanation. Let me know if anything else is needed.

[awwad]

👍 LGTM