Re: [PATCH] add a trivial patch style checker

[Julio M. Merino Vidal]

On 29/05/2007, at 18:12, Joel Schopp wrote:

> > > > +		if(!($prevline=~/\/\*\*/) && length($lineforcounting) > 80){
> > > Actually, I think this should be "> 79" (after stripping a .diff's
> > > control column), since the cursor may move to the 81th column when
> > > editing an 80-col line - which is what we want to avoid, no?
> > 80 tends to work for me because of that "if on 80 then don't wrap  
> > until
> > there is another character" behaviour of most terminals.  Anyone else
> > with a firm opinion.
>
> I think 80 is good.  What the specific number is does not matter  
> much, we all have screens wider than 80 characters.  The point is  
> just to have a number that prevents really long lines and prevents  
> people from indenting too many levels past our minds ability to  
> keep up.  We've already all been coding to 80, and it happens to be  
> a nice round number we can all remember and love.  The only reason  
> I see to select 79 is that prime numbers are generally cooler than  
> other numbers.

We do have screens wider than 80 characters, but almost all the time  
I spend in terminal windows, they are set to 24x80 (the default  
size).  It is a matter of habit, and I bet I'm not alone.  Hence, 80  
is "annoying" not only because patches will wrap, but also because in  
some editors the 80th character will also wrap.

Just my 2 cents,

--
Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmerino@xxxxxxxxxx>


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/