From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 82404 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2019 16:40:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 82374 invoked by uid 89); 5 Dec 2019 16:40:25 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=H*MI:sk:4A56F4A, H*f:sk:4A56F4A, H*i:sk:4A56F4A, koning X-HELO: us-smtp-1.mimecast.com Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (HELO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com) (205.139.110.120) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 16:40:24 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1575564022; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=WiJSNjS8yKo2wj8v3SZMMaNiuX/G8UABZZmGIbpYxcU=; b=Lqla3MLHbly94yWyoN912T6mQ0zdK3pbNVuhOyvTabRWM9wsf5mvFosegM/ulcH+T0KG0M kbABHp/tauua7qP7+iH+Ln20IFbrZ4P8fi2oFpsRW5x31Z/N5JE5eCwBUs3PsjIxt/tbbd wSumMNu6676kSiENS4bcoKscHEMHqdU= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-286-4WtttcZOPhe119QdSvzpWA-1; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 11:40:19 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBFFB8034CE; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 16:40:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-112-27.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.112.27]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40C4110013A1; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 16:40:15 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [RFC] Characters per line: from punch card (80) to line printer (132) (was: [Patch][OpenMP/OpenACC/Fortran] Fix mapping of optional (present|absent) arguments) To: Paul Koning , Joseph Myers Cc: Thomas Schwinge , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, fortran@gcc.gnu.org, Jakub Jelinek , Tobias Burnus , Michael Meissner References: <8be82276-81b1-817c-fcd2-51f24f5fe2d2@codesourcery.com> <20191205151515.GS10088@tucnak> <87lfrq6ahm.fsf@euler.schwinge.homeip.net> <4A56F4A2-4FAB-4FF3-AFEB-13142CEC9E4B@comcast.net> From: Jeff Law Message-ID: Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 16:40:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4A56F4A2-4FAB-4FF3-AFEB-13142CEC9E4B@comcast.net> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-12/txt/msg00069.txt.bz2 On 12/5/19 9:24 AM, Paul Koning wrote: >=20 >=20 >> On Dec 5, 2019, at 11:17 AM, Joseph Myers >> wrote: >>=20 >> On Thu, 5 Dec 2019, Thomas Schwinge wrote: >>=20 >>> In the relevant session at the GNU Tools Cauldron 2019, Michael >>> Meissner stated that even he is not using a 80 x 24 terminal >>> anymore, and that should tell us something. ;-) >>>=20 >>> So, I formally propose that we lift this characters per line >>> restriction from IBM punch card (80) to mainframe line printer >>> (132). >>=20 >> I thought these line lengths were based on readability studies >> suggesting lengths that lines shorter than 80 columns were more >> readable? >=20 > That's certainly a general rule. There is a reason why books aren't > wide, and why newspapers have columns. The eye can't deal well with > long lines. So while 132 column lines are certainly possible with > modern computers, it doesn't mean they are desirable. I'd like to see the restriction relaxed. THe 80 column limit really presents readability problems and excessive expression wrapping to accommodate the limit. 132 seems like a very reasonable compromise. My biggest worry with moving to 132 columns is that it will discourage refactoring when indention levels cause excessive wrapping. Jeff