We Keep Coding

Python Formatter Black - how to modify format of retrieving a dict value

I just set up my VS Code to use Black, the python formatter. The default format puts a dict key on a new line when referencing a value, like this,
my_function_call(
my_dict[
"my_key"
],
function_param2=var,
function_param3=another_var
)
I never write keys on a new line like that when referencing a dictionary. Instead, I would rather set it up on the same line, like so,
my_function_call(
function_param1=my_dict["my_key"],
function_param2=var,
function_param3=another_var
)
Is there a way to save specific modifications like this, or is black a take-what-you-get kind of extension? I haven't found anything in their docs or in a google search mentioning modifications
EDIT: Just checked and this is not due to black's default line length. The line of code I'm testing is not longer than default 88 chars.

No, you cannot configure how Black formats your code except for setting the line length. It intentionally doesn't have options to control formatting.
Black is the uncompromising Python code formatter. By using it, you agree to cede control over minutiae of hand-formatting. – PyPI

Flake8 - specify a range of errors to ignores?

flake8 supports specifying which error codes should be ignored, for instance:
per-file-ignores =
setup.py:E121,E122,E123
However, I wonder whether it is possible to specify a range of errors in the form of E121-E130 so that all errors that fall within the range E121-E130 would be ignored (i.e. E122, E123, E124 and so forth up to E130). I am obviously able to produce a list of these errors code strings programmatically so I don't have to type each of them manually, but it kind of pollutes my setup.cfg file.
Is it something that flake8 supports?

per-file-ignores supports the same syntax as the ignore option which is thoroughly documented.
In short, if you want to ignore all codes that start with E12 you can do
per-file-ignores =
setup.py:E12
Keep in mind that will also ignore E120. There's no other "range" operator because we allow users to specify a prefix to match against and that fits the 99% use-case.

Snippets vs. Abbreviations in Vim

What advantages and/or disadvantages are there to using a "snippets" plugin, e.g. snipmate, ultisnips, for VIM as opposed to simply using the builtin "abbreviations" functionality?
Are there specific use-cases where declaring iabbr, cabbr, etc. lack some major features that the snippets plugins provide? I've been unsuccessful in finding a thorough comparison between these two "features" and their respective implementations.
As #peter-rincker pointed out in a comment:
It should be noted that abbreviations can execute code as well. Often via <c-r>= or via an expression abbreviation (<expr>). Example which expands ## to the current file's path: :iabbrev ## <c-r>=expand('%:p')<cr>
As an example for python, let's compare a snipmate snippet and an abbrev in Vim for inserting lines for class declaration.
Snipmate
# New Class
snippet cl
class ${1:ClassName}(${2:object}):
"""${3:docstring for $1}"""
def __init__(self, ${4:arg}):
${5:super($1, self).__init__()}
self.$4 = $4
${6}
Vimscript
au FileType python :iabbr cl class ClassName(object):<CR><Tab>"""docstring for ClassName"""<CR>def __init__(self, arg):<CR><Tab>super(ClassName, self).__init__()<CR>self.arg = arg
Am I missing some fundamental functionality of "snippets" or am I correct in assuming they are overkill for the most part, when Vim's abbr and :help template templates are able to do all most of the stuff snippets do?
I assume it's easier to implement snippets, and they provide additional aesthetic/visual features. For instance, if I use abbr in Vim and other plugins for running/testing python code inside vim--e.g. syntastic, pytest, ropevim, pep8, etc--am I missing out on some key features that snippets provide?

Everything that can be done with snippets can be done with abbreviations and vice-versa. You can have (mirrored or not) placeholders with abbreviations, you can have context-sensitive snippets.
There are two important differences:
Abbreviations are triggered when the abbreviation text has been typed, and a non word character (or esc) is hit. Snippets are triggered on demand, and shortcuts are possible (no need to type while + tab. w + tab may be enough).
It's much more easier to define new snippets (or to maintain old ones) than to define abbreviations. With abbreviations, a lot of boiler plate code is required when we want to do neat things.
There are a few other differences. For instance, abbreviations are always triggered everywhere. And seeing for expanded into for(placeholder) {\n} within a comment or a string context is certainly not what the end-user expects. With snippets, this is not a problem any more: we can expect the end-user to know what's he's doing when he asks to expand a snippet. Still, we can propose context-aware snippets that expand throw into #throw {domain::exception} {explanation} within a comment, or into throw domain::exception({message}); elsewhere.

Snippets
Rough superset of Vim's native abbreviations. Here are the highlights:
Only trigger on key press
Uses placeholders which a user can jump between
Exist only for insert mode
Dynamic expansions
Abbreviations
Great for common typos and small snippets.
Native to Vim so no need for plugins
Typically expand on whitespace or <c-]>
Some special rules on trigger text (See :h abbreviations)
Can be used in command mode via :cabbrev (often used to create command aliases)
No placeholders
Dynamic expansions
Conclusion
For the most part snippets are more powerful and provide many features that other editors enjoy, but you can use both and many people do. Abbreviations enjoy the benefit of being native which can be useful for remote environments. Abbreviations also enjoy another clear advantage which is can be used in command mode.

Snippets are more powerful.
Depending on the implementation, snippets can let you change (or accept defaults for) multiple placeholders and can even execute code when the snippet is expanded.
For example with ultisnips, you can have it execute shell commands, vimscript but also Python code.
An (ultisnips) example:
snippet hdr "General file header" b
# file: `!v expand('%:t')`
# vim:fileencoding=utf-8:ft=`!v &filetype`
# ${1}
#
# Author: ${2:J. Doe} ${3:<jdoe#gmail.com>}
# Created: `!v strftime("%F %T %z")`
# Last modified: `!v strftime("%F %T %z")`
endsnippet
This presents you with three placeholders to fill in (it gives default values for two of them), and sets the filename, filetype and current date and time.
After the word "snippet", the start line contains three items;
the trigger string,
a description and
options for the snippet.
Personally I mostly use the b option where the snippet is expanded at the beginning of a line and the w option that expands the snippet if the trigger string starts at the beginning of a word.
Note that you have to type the trigger string and then input a key or key combination that actually triggers the expansion. So a snippet is not expanded unless you want it to.
Additionally, snippets can be specialized by filetype. Suppose you want to define four levels of headings, h1 .. h4. You can have the same name expand differently between e.g. an HTML, markdown, LaTeX or restructuredtext file.

snippets are like the built-in :abbreviate on steroids, usually with:
parameter insertions: You can insert (type or select) text fragments in various places inside the snippet. An abbreviation just expands once.
mirroring: Parameters may be repeated (maybe even in transformed fashion) elsewhere in the snippet, usually updated as you type.
multiple stops inside: You can jump from one point to another within the snippet, sometimes even recursively expand snippets within one.
There are three things to evaluate in a snippet plugin: First, the features of the snippet engine itself, second, the quality and breadth of snippets provided by the author or others; third, how easy it is to add new snippets.

How to make "--" appear in sphinx instead of "-"

I'm having a small aesthetic problem with sphinx, I want "--" to appear in the document, but it keeps coming out as "-".
Example source:
remove_user (--id|--username|--email) <user_id> <source_account>
---------------
**To remove a User (and any devices associated with them) from a specific account, the following command can be used:**
* pcli.py remove_user (--id|--username|--email) <user_id> <source_account>
How it looks:

Basically it's due to the html_use_smartypants option which is turned on by default (see doc). In your case you would want to turn it off.
In conf.py, find the line
#html_use_smartypants = True
And change it to
html_use_smartypants = False
EDIT:
html_use_smartypants has been deprecated and smartquotes should be used instead.

Vim neocomplcache: disable usage prompt

I am using Vim with neocomplcache plugin, its feature of usage prompt while completion confused me so much.
It behaved like this: I typed <C-X><C-U> when the cursor was at the end of os.path., then not only completion candidates was listed under the line, but also a horizontal split
which contained docstring of the first candidate appeared
at the top. My question is: how to get rid of this feature so that I only get code completion without the usage prompt?

It's all because preview is in completeopt by default, you can see its value by type
command :set completeopt and the result should be completeopt=menu,preview.
What we need is just menu, so cut the preview, add this line in your vimrc:
set completeopt-=preview
vim help reference:
*'completeopt'* *'cot'*
'completeopt' 'cot' string (default: "menu,preview")
global
{not available when compiled without the
|+insert_expand| feature}
{not in Vi}
A comma separated list of options for Insert mode completion
|ins-completion|. The supported values are:
menu Use a popup menu to show the possible completions. The
menu is only shown when there is more than one match and
sufficient colors are available. |ins-completion-menu|
menuone Use the popup menu also when there is only one match.
Useful when there is additional information about the
match, e.g., what file it comes from.
longest Only insert the longest common text of the matches. If
the menu is displayed you can use CTRL-L to add more
characters. Whether case is ignored depends on the kind
of completion. For buffer text the 'ignorecase' option is
used.
preview Show extra information about the currently selected
completion in the preview window. Only works in
combination with "menu" or "menuone".