On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Jess Austin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Aaron Rubin
> subjective ones. Arguing over *how* to break lines is actually a pretty
> strong argument that time is wasted spent on such issues. A longer line
> width would reduce these arguments, since less would need to be wrapped.
This is an unsupported, and IMHO largely incorrect, assumption.
Several correspondents have noted that they most often overrun their
intended line length by one or two characters. Just as there's
nothing magical about the number "80", there's nothing magical about
"81" or "82" either. In a regime of 90-character lines, the limit
will most often be exceeded by one or two characters. The same will
happen in a regime of 100-character lines, etc. We'll still need to
break lines, and wrapping them in parentheses will still be the best
way to do that.
How can you argue that it wouldn't create *less* line wrapping? According to your argument having 10,000 character width lines wouldn't create less line wrapping either. Nobody ever said it would eliminate it, just reduce it.
This sentiment reminds me of those road-construction enthusiasts who
are always certain that the _next_ newly-built highway will end
traffic jams forever. What happens instead is that the new road fills
with cars too, and it still takes forever to get to work.
ps. ride a bike!