The platform checks are indeed fragile, but that's why the code is defensive, and degrades gracefully. And an environment variable will just substitute one brittle width (80) with another, so I'll never use it (since I am constantly fiddling with the size of my terminal windows), but if someone else finds it useful, then it should be checked for first. So I agree with your 1-2-3 list, and I think the default should not be infinite; if people want to see the whole list they can use -D, but if they use -T it's because they want to see one task per line for easy visual scanning.
IMHO :-) - A On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Jim Weirich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Apr 12, 2008, at 12:19 AM, Alex Chaffee wrote: > > > Did you get my patch for the dynamic line endings? I didn't see a > > reply from you on the list. > > > > Yes, I got the email. Thanks for the feedback. I'm definitely going to do > something about the line length (there's been enough negative feedback on > that choice). At the very least it will be sensitive to an environment > variable. I'm trying to decide on whether or not to include the 'stty size' > trick or not. The platform checks seem to me to be fragile. > > I'm thinking of checking for terminal width in this order: > > (1) Explicit environment variable > (2) stty size output > (3) assume 80 characters > > Open questions: > > (a) Should I bother with the stty check, given that's it is fragile and > won't work on a significant number of platforms? > (b) Would it be better to assume infinite width rather than 80? > > -- > -- Jim Weirich > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Alex Chaffee - Pivotal Labs [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Rake-devel mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rake-devel
