* James Edward Gray II (Mar 23, 2005 01:40):
> > >And while we're getting things off our chest, it really bugs me
> > >when people don't keep their code within the 80 character boundary
> > >guideline.  I've been reading all the links posted in this thread
> > >and they've all recommended it, but I can sure tell you from
> > >running Ruby Quiz that not everyone is listening.  ;)
> >
> > Actually, for the Quiz, 72 would be a better limit, as that works
> > best for mails.
> >
> > Seriously, though, the 80 character boundary is a thing of the past.

> All space and tab holy war fun aside, I strongly disagree on this
> point and would like a chance to plead my case.  Here's some food for
> thought:  If it's so in the past, why does almost everyone still
> recommend it?

> The truth is that is has nothing to do with terminals anymore, in my
> not at all humble opinion.  You've just pointed out a great reason
> above:  email clients.  Here's another one:  Web pages.  90% of the
> problems I have with the current Ruby Quiz site are that the code
> often overflows the boxes.  I hand edit each and every chunk of code
> in a never-ending battle against this.  I'm trying to come up with a
> good solution for it in the Ruby Quiz 2.0 site, but that's harder than
> it sounds.  I want the new site to include the code as that'll open up
> a lot of exciting options, but I have to figure out how to do this
> realistically first and this issue is the biggest hurdle.

As I said, 72 would be a better limit for the Quiz.

> Ironically, I still don't think those are the biggest reason to do it.

> I believe the number one reason you should still keep code at 80
> characters per line is to help authors put your work in their books.
> It just so happens that a typical programming book with reasonable
> fonts and light indenting of the code examples has darn near 80
> characters of space to play with.  You do want everyone writing about
> your code don't you?  I bet you'll shorten that margin back up when
> you begin writing your first masterpiece.  ;)

How often is this the case?  I have yet to see a book displaying
snippets of code from actual software beyond showing of horrible coding
practices (perhaps a good reason to stay within the 80-characters-per-
line limit, as you don't want to end up in one of those books).

I know Holub on Patterns is an exception (a book you seem to hold very
dear), as it is more or less a "patterns in the wild"-kinda book.
Still, not many books are written that way.  Most write the code for the
book, not the other way around.

> To summarize, it isn't just about terminals.  Be kind to your email
> reader, webmaster, and author.  Stick with 80.

Be kind to yourself: expand your horizon,
        nikolai

-- 
::: name: Nikolai Weibull    :: aliases: pcp / lone-star / aka :::
::: born: Chicago, IL USA    :: loc atm: Gothenburg, Sweden    :::
::: page: minimalistic.org   :: fun atm: gf,lps,ruby,lisp,war3 :::
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}