![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Friday 13 February 2004 17:10, Andrew Morton wrote: > Giuliano Pochini <pochini@shiny.it> wrote: > > > > > > On 12-Feb-2004 Michael Frank wrote: > > > Here is Codingstyle updated. > > > > > +The limit on the length of lines is 80 columns and this is a hard limit. Sorry, I "shortened" that line away and will add it again. > > > > Well, I think this requirement is a bit silly IMHO. How many of us > > do usually code in a 80x25 terminal screen nowadays ? I still use 80 wide but with many more lines. I tend to be sloppy about code extending beyond 80, which I shall change ;) Also bear in mind that the fundamental arguments for 80 columns are not related to (display) hardware capabilities, but related to clarity of code. > > > > "I think the 90x25 requirement is silly" > > "I think the 100x25 requirement is silly" > > And so it goes. You get into an xterm arms race wherein everyone has to > make their terminal as wide as the widest guy so anyone can get any work > done. > > Yes, 80 cols sucks and the world would be a better place had CodingStyle > mandated 96 columns five years ago. But it didn't happen. > As to "five years ago", what about review the coding style situation before starting 2.7: In view of better hardware, increasing linelength a little to 96 could be considered without increasing the number of indentation levels. Perhaps consider deprecating function-like macros as inline technology is much improved. ... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:00 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||