-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Feb 21, 2008, at 12:30 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> > wrote: >> Why should docstrings and comments be limited to 72 characters when >> code is limited to 79 characters? I ask because there is an ongoing >> debate at my company about this. > > People in your company have too much time on their hands. :-) C'mon, bike shedding is so much fun! :) >> Personally, I see no justification for it, and further, it's a pita >> to >> support automatically because tools like Emacs only have one auto- >> wrapping variable (fill-column). Emacs doesn't know that it should >> fill comments and docstrings different than code lines, so you have >> to >> do a bunch of manual crud to support these guidelines. >> >> I recommend removing the guideline of 72 characters, and just say >> everything, code, comments, and docstrings should be no wider than 79 >> characters. > > I'm fine with getting rid of this, but since that originally comes > from me, here's my justification. Somehow my Emacs usually defaults to > 72 for its fill column. That means that when I reflow text in a block > comment or docstring, it'll use this limit. OTOH I don't use anything > to automatically fold long code lines: when they start wrapping I > manually decide on the best place to break it (and my windows are > typically 80 chars wide so I can have several side by side(*)). I do the same thing sometimes too. > However there are occasions where I manually format docstrings or > comments, and then I will again use 79 as the limit. Yep. > (*) When is Emacs going to fix the bug where it decides to fold a line > that's exactly as wide as the window? This 79 business is really > silly, and had to impose on people using other editors. In 50 years, our grandchildren will be writing code with brain implants and displays burned right into their retina, and they'll / still/ be subject to 79 characters. I laugh every time I think that they'll have no idea why it is, but they'll still be unable to change it. :) - -Barry -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBR79gjHEjvBPtnXfVAQLn/AQApsNQ7KvoBM6wJgKUDHkS97Sd0qTYeRCy qjFQE/hUtAGebqic3fcAEP3ASPp12fOnBpOWOxm0aQURoDdTi+ClTsXp6v/1aztf 9yC1xT3BH022Te82d3vLgRhixxregHZ+5i8ravb3Tb/xdUa3gouql+DyJw8tEAek MGMdcrqoEfE= =FiB+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4