Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 3 Feb 2012 12:57:15 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: Increase the line length limit from 80 to 100 colums |
| |
On Fri, 3 Feb 2012 11:07:43 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: Increase the line length limit from 80 to 100 colums > > The overwhelming majority of kernel developers have stopped > using 80 col terminals years ago. > > As far as I'm aware I was the last regular kernel contributor > who still used a standard VGA text console, but both text > consoles and using them to read the kernel source code has > become increasingly gruesome years ago so I switched to a wider > terminal two years ago.
I always use 80-cols, everywhere. Not because I particularly like it - I find it a bit too small. I use it because it is the standard, and using it helps me see where and how badly we violate the standard.
We've actually done pretty well - linewrap in 80 cols rarely causes me problems. It's sufficiently rare that when it *does* happen, it really stands out.
IOW, the changelog is quite the exaggeration.
> So lets increase the limit to 100 cols
I think that's going too far - 96 will be enough and it's a multiple of 8.
The multiple-of-8 thing seems pleasing but probably doesn't matter much. It means that things like
if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) { if (foo) {
will line up properly.
If we really want to improve the world we should jump into a time machine and set tabstops to 4. Sigh.
| |