I used to be a 80 chars kind of guy, but working with Simon on the type checker, I did get into the habit of using 120. It has stuck with me. Especially in Haskell, there is a lot of value in that additional space, especially if you like to have descriptive identifiers.
(In statement-oriented languages, 80 chars are far less limiting.) Manuel > Simon Peyton Jones <[email protected]>: > > I don’t have a strong view but like Richard I find 80 chars limiting. > > I agree that we should resolve this and write down the result on the coding > style page > > Simon > > | -----Original Message----- > | From: ghc-devs [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > | Richard Eisenberg > | Sent: 25 November 2015 03:23 > | To: Evan Laforge <[email protected]> > | Cc: [email protected] > | Subject: Re: ok to do reformatting commits? > | > | Thanks for volunteering to do this work, but I'm afraid now is a > | terrible time to do it. I know of three significant patches that are > | about to be committed, and your reformatting would cause quite a few > | merge conflicts. If there is a lull between a feature freeze and a > | ghc-8.0 fork, that would be the ideal time, to my mind. > | > | That said, I remain unconvinced that a rigid commitment to 80-char > | lines is in our best interest. My personal vote is to continue to have > | 80 characters as a guideline but to keep the current practice of > | allowing programmer discretion. > | > | Richard > | > | On Nov 24, 2015, at 10:14 PM, Evan Laforge <[email protected]> wrote: > | > | > When I was doing a recent patch, I was annoyed by lint errors about > | >> 80 lines when I was just conforming to the existing style. To > | avoid > | > cluttering my commit with unrelated changes, I decided to fix the > | > lints in a formatting-only commit afterwards. Looking in the > | > archives, I see there was some recent discussion about this, but I > | > didn't see anyone volunteering to just go wrap a bunch of files, or > | > saying that they didn't want anyone to do this (usual reason being > | > cluttering the history, which as a rationale to not do formatting > | only > | > changes never sat too well with me). > | > > | > Would anyone mind if I went and wrapped a bunch of files, say > | > typecheck/*.hs? This seems simpler than either constant hassling > | from > | > arc or coming up with more elaborate rules for arc. I would have to > | > make some formatting decisions, so likely to some eyes I would be > | > messing some stuff up, but since there's no real standard that is > | > probably unavoidable. > | > _______________________________________________ > | > ghc-devs mailing list > | > [email protected] > | > > | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fmail.h > | > askell.org%2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fghc- > | devs&data=01%7c01%7csi > | > > | monpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7c27ba726d65bd49df735d08d2f547c211%7c72 > | > > | f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=iGQx%2bYYoG%2bv7xCd6Su%2bzN1L > | > gIjx5FxEqmWOSpIbLnjY%3d > | > | _______________________________________________ > | ghc-devs mailing list > | [email protected] > | https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fmail.h > | askell.org%2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fghc- > | devs&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7c27ba726d65bd49d > | f735d08d2f547c211%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=iGQx%2b > | YYoG%2bv7xCd6Su%2bzN1LgIjx5FxEqmWOSpIbLnjY%3d > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
