> From: Dave Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 2008-05-01 18:40:58 CEST > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [phpGroupWare-developers] line lengths > > On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 23:58 +0200, Sigurd Nes wrote: > > Chris Weiss wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 3:28 PM, Dave Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 08:43 -0500, Chris Weiss wrote: > > >> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Dave Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > Yes, but also very long lines can indicate inelegant solutions. > > >> > > > >> > php is an inelegant solution. more elegant than Basic though, where > > >> > splitting up line is just plain tedious and limiting > > >> > > > >> > And just because it can be, doesn't mean it is, thus a target with no > > >> > hard limit. > > >> > > >> Compromise is warn at 100 with no error? > > >> > > >> > > > > > > yes, but i think Sigurd's point is that the number of warning and > > > errors caused by line length may be overwelming. would be interesting > > > to see the difference > > > > > > > Recursive test for lengths on phpgwapi gives: > > A TOTAL OF 17248 ERROR(S) AND 7627 WARNING(S) WERE FOUND IN 477 FILE(S) > > > > Errors being at length 100. > > So what do you get using warnings at 100 and no error trigger which is > what was proposed? Also are you sure you are only checking PHP files > which are ours, not 3 party libraries too? These should be excluded. >
Seems to me that you are the only one that (really) want this - why not let it go? Regards Sigurd
_______________________________________________ phpGroupWare-developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/phpgroupware-developers
