On 30/10/2012, at 3:28 AM, Alexander Solla wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Michael Orlitzky <mich...@orlitzky.com> > wrote: > In any language, a line longer than 80 characters usually (but not > always) suggests that you might want to stop and rethink your design. In > many cases a refactoring or two will greatly simplify the code and > reduce your line length as a result. > > I disagree. That might be true for imperative languages, where width is > indicative of deep nesting and its associated problems. But it is not true > for a functional language, where it is merely indicative of a wide "normal > form". Yes, the normal form can sometimes be refactored, but to what end?
Better code? I have no idea of what "a wide normal form" might be, and less idea of why that would imply that a narrower and better form does not also exist. We can argue till everyone is sick and tired and still not reach any kind of consensus. Let's have some *examples*. (For the record, the longest line lengths I've ever seen have been in C++ and Java. I know someone who, and I am not kidding, thinks a 390- column line in code intended to be read by other people is OK.) My own perspective is that if I can't fit it onto one slide in large type for my students to see it is too big. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
