On Thursday 05 January 2006 13:02, Kay Sievers wrote:
> Can't we relax the 80 column line rule to something more comfortable?
> These days descriptive variable/function names are much more valuable,
> I think.
>
> Just by looking at random examples in the tree, seems the 80 column
> rule does more harm than good. I always find myself start shortening
> names just to fit the line limit and not to need to line-wrap a statement.
I've found myself drifting to and from favouring the 80 cols limit in my own
code. It's a good way of forcing yourself to refactor, which usually works
out nicely, and I've even managed to write Java that was mostly 80 cols
(which is a far bigger challenge than C due to the required preceding tab
depth for a method inside a class..)
> We even use #defines sometimes to access simple structure members and
> the like, only to fit that rule.
This is usually for multiple levels of dereferencing, and it really does help
readability.
> So, are we sure that 80 columns is still valuable, looking at the
> side-effects of artificially shortended variable/function names and
> line-wrapped statements, caused by this rule?
It's fairly redundant trying to answer this question without the opinion of
the people that really matter. I'd hazard a guess and say that if you ranked
kernel contributors by man-hours spent on the kernel, the top ten would all
think the 80 columns rule was critically important.
--
Cheers,
Alistair.
'No sense being pessimistic, it probably wouldn't work anyway.'
Third year Computer Science undergraduate.
1F2 55 South Clerk Street, Edinburgh, UK.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
