On 2017-11-10 2:05 PM, Jon Steinhart wrote: > Nemo writes: >> On 9 November 2017 at 14:14, Ron Natalie wrote: >>> At least it’s not python where the indenting makes a semantic difference. >> >> And for that reason, I have never used Python. (I have a mental block >> about that.) > > ... > Separate from this, I think that the whole 80 column thing is a bit silly. > I have used 132 as by default for a long time now. Would go wider but just > because I have always found it worthwhile spending money on the best monitors > doesn't mean that everyone else can. Everything including my laptop is now > a UHD monitor which rocks! > > I feel that longer lines work better than one-character variable names. > And, longer lines are way more readable than wrapped lines. I have never > been fond of the notion that code should be broken up into functions for the > purpose of keeping lines short; I feel that code should be broken up into > functions if it makes sense to do so, for example if the functions are used > more than once. Writing for the limitations of the I/O device doesn't seem > to be a good paradigm. > > In any case, I don't think that being an old UNIX person means that one has > to live in the past. There was nothing magic about 80 columns; it was just > the technology of the time. Technology has changed, so move on. Just don't move on without some limit. There are real cognitive/typographic reasons why excessively long lines hurt comprehension. This is why both 500 year old books and 5 month old books have narrow measures. 80 might be too narrow for most, but at some point beyond 132 is "too far". :) --Toby > > Jon >