79 chars or more?

[BartC]

"James Mills" <prologic at shortcircuit.net.au> wrote in message 
news:mailman.2222.1282019212.1673.python-list at python.org...
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:12 PM, AK <andrei.avk at gmail.com> wrote:
>> There's no doubt that there are pro's and con's, but to be fair, it's
>> not like code becomes unreadable over 79 chars - the difference is that
>> when your terminal is 80 chars, it's less convenient for you to read
>> code that's wider and when your terminal is wider, it's less convenient
>> to read code that's 79 chars.
>
> I guess there are two-sides to the coin here so to speak. See I'm
> vision impaired
> so I prefer a 79 char width in my own projects

That's not a good argument for everyone else to do the same. Someone else 
might prefer 40 columns for similar reasons.

(Anyway can't a 100-column width be squeezed into the same angular field as 
80-columns, just by using a narrower font, when necessary? Assuming the 
problem is field width rather than acuity)

> The other side is this... I'm of the opinion that if you're writing a
> line of code
> that's excessively long (>80char or say >100chars), then you might want to
> reconsider what you're doing :) (It might be wrong).

I generally use 100 columns. It's useful for being able to write same-line 
comments with meaningful content...

(I've used 80-column hardware (teletypes and such) years ago, I thought such 
restrictions had vanished long ago)

-- 
Bartc