On 08/20/2017 09:32 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-08-20 09:29:39 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> On 08/20/2017 07:49 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We currently still have the guideline that code should fit into an 80
>>> character window. But an increasing amount of the code, and code
>>> submissions, don't adhere to that (e.g. copy.c, which triggered me to
>>> write this email). And I mean outside of accepted "exceptions" like
>>> error messages. And there's less need for such a relatively tight limit
>>> these days. Perhaps we should up the guideline to 90 or 100 chars?
>>
>> Considering the prominence of high resolution monitors and the fact that we
>> don't really review patches (outside of commentary) in email much anymore,
>> it seems that may even be a bit archaic. On my standard FHD screen using a
>> standard size font I have a line length of 210 before I wrap.
>
> People commonly display multiple buffers side-by-side... But leaving
> that aside, longer and longer lines actually become just hard to read
> and hint that statements should be broken across lines / indentation
> reduced by splitting inner blocks into their own functions.
Good point. I think ~ 100 is probably a good idea.
JD
>
> - Andres
>
--
Command Prompt, Inc. || http://the.postgres.company/ || @cmdpromptinc
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Advocate: @amplifypostgres || Learn: https://pgconf.us
***** Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own. *****