Checking that a string matches one regex and doesn't match another

Question

I'm using pylint and flake8 to control the code quality. However I am in check-mate position, where styling one does not suit the pylint or flake8:

if (not re.search(regexp, summary) and
 not re.search(regexp2, summary)): 
 return False 

Output from flake8:

visually indented line with same indent as next logical line [E129] 

Moving return is not helping, the previous error still occurs and there is new one thrown by pylint:

if (not re.search(regexp, summary) and
 not re.search(regexp2, summary)): 
 return False 

Output from pylint:

[bad-indentation] Bad indentation. Found 8 spaces, expected 4 

• 200_success: What are the two regular expressions? Please provide full context for your question.

Answer 1

Per PEP-8, you can ("Acceptable options in this situation include, but are not limited to...") further indent the second line of the condition:

# Add some extra indentation on the conditional continuation line.
if (this_is_one_thing
 and that_is_another_thing):
 do_something()

The difference is that indentation in the continuation lines is purely stylistic, whereas indentation of the next code block has semantic meaning. In your case:

if (not re.search(regexp, summary)
 and not re.search(regexp2, summary)): 
 return False 

Note I have moved the and per the same guidance.

• Adriano Repetti: In addition: I'd also consider to move that complex condition into a separate function. There are good chances that the purpose of a long wall of text isn't immediately obvious
• jonrsharpe: @AdrianoRepetti that would be another option, although if the regexes have sensible names I think a two-part conditional is OK. You don't want to end up writing if is_foo_and_bar(thing): when if is_foo(thing) and is_bar(thing): is just as readable!
• Adriano Repetti: I agree but it won't then be probably long enough to need to split. Also is_foo_and_bar(thing) might be is_buz(thing) (because foo and bar together mean something else), in that case a local variable or a function will definitely clarify. Anyway, it's just another option to consider, not The Way to Go