This pull request gives a possible solution to issue #96.
The current behaviour is to trigger E225 when there is no whitespace around any binary operator. This patch relaxes the condition in line with recent to revisions to pep-8. High precedence mathematical operators (, *, /, //) are handled in a whitespace optional manner. This means statements like 2*30, (x + y)(x - y) are now valid and no longer trigger E225.
Given the flexibility built into the new definition of pep8, we could further relax the check to allow statements like (x+y) to be valid, but in my experience this would not be a good move.
I think this patch strikes the right balance between allowing common conventions while preventing vasts blocks of run on code with no distinguishing whitespace.
Add optional surrounding whitespace to high precedence mathematical o…
…perators (*, **, /, //). Addresses issue #96
Handle non-unary, whitespace optional operators correctly. #96