TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Simon Wright <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 30 Aug 2003 08:10:03 +0100
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]> (message from Stephen Leake on Fri, 29 Aug 2003 12:52:08 -0400)
X-To:
Reply-To:
Simon Wright <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
> From: Stephen Leake <[log in to unmask]>

> Ada is a "tool for the next century"; let's not carry the "support
> legacy stuff" too far. There's no excuse for a line length limit of
> less than 120.

I just checked some books, a paperback has lines of about 55
characters and a large textbook 85. Anything more can get quite hard
to read. And code is usually presented in a clumsy monospaced
typeface.

I know that's for text not code, but there is likely to be some
similarity since it's related to the way eyes/brains work.

I'll stick with the 79.

(I find that many people who don't respect the line length limit don't
respect many other coding conventions, either).

ATOM RSS1 RSS2