The way you phrase the question, you're not going to get any of these
answers. Who is programming parrot on their *physical* VT100? =-).
The primary reason for an 80 column limit is developer convenience, I
think.
On the other hand, I think taking the preferences of the core
developers into account is a *good* thing, but I don't think any of
us will quit if you come back with a higher number. Except maybe
Jerry. =-)
I just ask that if the PDD is in error ("Do not exceed 79 columns"),
we get it updated after a decision is made.
Regards!
P.S.: Seems only fair that if we're sticking with C89, we stick with
1989 terminal sizes. =-)
On Aug 21, 2006, at 10:22 AM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
So ambs has been making a lot of source changes as suggested by
t/distro/linelength.t. (And making them very well, I might add.)
Given the
nature of Parrot code, I think a bit wider would be OK. Would anyone
currently hacking Parrot be significantly inconvenienced by having
wider
lines?
BTW, this is NOT a style preference question. The only reason I'm
bugging
the list with this question is to solicit stories of "80 columns
are the max
supported by <tool/hardware you're using>". adTHANKSvance
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Will "Coke" Coleda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
