Re: [Python-ideas] 80 character line width vs. something wider
Okay, I'm convinced. 80 is EXACTLY the right number. 79 is too few and 81 is WAY over the top. It doesn't matter what language your coding in, which century you're living in, or your preference for tab sizes. Looking back, I'm amazed that there was every any commercial success for line printers that had more than 80 characters. Those guys who made green bar paper were seriously misguided. How could they ignore the one true universal programming constant. Raymond
Why isn't the ideal line length the same as the answer to life, the universe, and everything? (if it were, I could read a line on my Blackberry without resorting to 2-point type) On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Raymond Hettinger <python@rcn.com> wrote:
-- Gerald Britton
On Thu, May 21, 2009, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
Could you explain why you have so much emotion invested in this issue?
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo Emerson
Could you explain why you have so much emotion invested in this issue?
I'm mostly having light-hearted fun with it. The conversation wasn't going anywhere from the start. I do find it funny that so many think 80 is exactly the right number regardless of other whitespace conventions or regardless of the language being used. I do think the OP was right on at least one point. I think all of us at one time or another has seen code get mangled in attempts to comply with an arbitrary line length limit. But this is the exception, not the norm. Raymond
On Thu, May 21, 2009, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
If that's what you think people are saying, I don't think you are using sufficient care in your reading. It seems to me that people are mostly saying that eighty columns is enough for many purposes, there are problems that would come from increasing the number of columns, and there aren't any solid arguments that clearly demonstrate that the gains outweigh the detriments. My take is that the people who claim that we would be having this exact conversation if the standard were 100 characters are precisely correct. There will always be people pushing longer lines, and there needs to be better argumentation before we abandon the current standard. -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo Emerson
Aahz wrote:
Well, on Ubuntu I use the gnome terminal which has line width settings of 80 and 132. It doesn't have any settings in-between. So I use 80X24 because it gives me plenty of room to see other windows. Possibly if there was a 100 character width, I might use it. The 132 character width setting takes up too much horizontal room on my desktop. I found that if I use small font sizes, I tend to lean closer to the monitor than I should and that causes my neck and back to ache if I'm at my computer for longer than a few hours. So although I can reduce the font size and get a lot more characters across the screen, it is better for my health if I don't do that. Cheers, Ron
On Thu, May 21, 2009, Ron Adam wrote:
Actually, you can have different window sizes, either by dragging with a mouse or using the command-line option --geometry.
Very this. -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo Emerson
Ron Adam <rrr@ronadam.com> writes:
So although I can reduce the font size and get a lot more characters across the screen, it is better for my health if I don't do that.
+1 QOTW -- \ “I used to be an airline pilot. I got fired because I kept | `\ locking the keys in the plane. They caught me on an 80 foot | _o__) stepladder with a coathanger.” —Steven Wright | Ben Finney
"Raymond Hettinger" <python@rcn.com> writes:
That's a strange thing to be convinced of, since it's nowhere near a position anyone has been advocating in this discussion. Perhaps you're intent on seeing only the extremes? -- \ “As the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed, | `\ the Internet deserves the highest protection from governmental | _o__) intrusion.” —U.S. District Court Judge Dalzell | Ben Finney
Why isn't the ideal line length the same as the answer to life, the universe, and everything? (if it were, I could read a line on my Blackberry without resorting to 2-point type) On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Raymond Hettinger <python@rcn.com> wrote:
-- Gerald Britton
On Thu, May 21, 2009, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
Could you explain why you have so much emotion invested in this issue?
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo Emerson
Could you explain why you have so much emotion invested in this issue?
I'm mostly having light-hearted fun with it. The conversation wasn't going anywhere from the start. I do find it funny that so many think 80 is exactly the right number regardless of other whitespace conventions or regardless of the language being used. I do think the OP was right on at least one point. I think all of us at one time or another has seen code get mangled in attempts to comply with an arbitrary line length limit. But this is the exception, not the norm. Raymond
On Thu, May 21, 2009, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
If that's what you think people are saying, I don't think you are using sufficient care in your reading. It seems to me that people are mostly saying that eighty columns is enough for many purposes, there are problems that would come from increasing the number of columns, and there aren't any solid arguments that clearly demonstrate that the gains outweigh the detriments. My take is that the people who claim that we would be having this exact conversation if the standard were 100 characters are precisely correct. There will always be people pushing longer lines, and there needs to be better argumentation before we abandon the current standard. -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo Emerson
Aahz wrote:
Well, on Ubuntu I use the gnome terminal which has line width settings of 80 and 132. It doesn't have any settings in-between. So I use 80X24 because it gives me plenty of room to see other windows. Possibly if there was a 100 character width, I might use it. The 132 character width setting takes up too much horizontal room on my desktop. I found that if I use small font sizes, I tend to lean closer to the monitor than I should and that causes my neck and back to ache if I'm at my computer for longer than a few hours. So although I can reduce the font size and get a lot more characters across the screen, it is better for my health if I don't do that. Cheers, Ron
On Thu, May 21, 2009, Ron Adam wrote:
Actually, you can have different window sizes, either by dragging with a mouse or using the command-line option --geometry.
Very this. -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo Emerson
Ron Adam <rrr@ronadam.com> writes:
So although I can reduce the font size and get a lot more characters across the screen, it is better for my health if I don't do that.
+1 QOTW -- \ “I used to be an airline pilot. I got fired because I kept | `\ locking the keys in the plane. They caught me on an 80 foot | _o__) stepladder with a coathanger.” —Steven Wright | Ben Finney
"Raymond Hettinger" <python@rcn.com> writes:
That's a strange thing to be convinced of, since it's nowhere near a position anyone has been advocating in this discussion. Perhaps you're intent on seeing only the extremes? -- \ “As the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed, | `\ the Internet deserves the highest protection from governmental | _o__) intrusion.” —U.S. District Court Judge Dalzell | Ben Finney
participants (6)
-
Aahz -
Aaron Rubin -
Ben Finney -
Gerald Britton -
Raymond Hettinger -
Ron Adam