Rustom Mody <rustompm...@gmail.com> writes: > You said this: > > > The 80 character line limit is *not* driven by a limitation of > > computer technology; it is driven by a limitation of human > > cognition. For that reason, it remains relevant until human > > cognition in the general reading population improves. > > And you answered: > > > Until then may we relegate '79' to quaint historical > > curiosities...?? > > with > > > Not until the general capacity of human cognition advances to make > > longer lines easier to read.
Indeed. Once again: Human cognition has limits, including limits on reading speed and reading comprehension as the length of a line of text increases beyond a threshold. You have caricatured that as some kind of statement that every human has a fundamental 79-column limit, which no-one has claimed. If you can't see the difference between what I and others have been saying about limits on human cognition, versus your caricature, then I can only leave you to re-read until you do understand. And I'll thank you not to straw-man people's positions. -- \ “Dyslexia means never having to say that you're ysror.” | `\ —anonymous | _o__) | Ben Finney -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
