On Sat 04/01/06 at 17:44 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > By relaxing the limit to 132 characters you are *forcing* everybody to > > switch to 132 wide xterms. > > You are wrong. > 1. Many of those tools support horizontal scrolling and continuation. > 2. I did not say to reformat all existing code. I just asked for the > option to allow wider character widths on demand when it is usefull. > 3. I do not expect that everyone will use all 52 (= 132 - 80) additional > characters to the full extend
It doesn't matter. If any important bit of the code has >80 characters per line, then everybody has to work with it. If you decide that your new function in vm_page.c would be more readable with 132 characters per line, then every VM engineer has to adopt a new way of working. > > (Or to face code which is much less readable > > than code formatted to fit 80 columns; 132 wrapped to 80 is just not > > a pretty sight. > > I agree. But if you look at the existing code it's usually only a few > extra characters which are needed to make the code MUCH more readable. That may be true. It's also true that if we had a maximum width of 100 characters there would be a whole new set of lines that would be MUCH more readable if we made the maximum length 115 characters. If we set the max at 115, we would find a new set of lines that would be oh so much more readable with a 132 character limit. > > I think you'll find that the C-style rules are not open for negotiation. > > What do other Sun engineers think about this ? I don't care whether ON enforces them or not. They will continue to be the rules for any project I'm running. _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
