On 07/06/15 18:54, Allan Wegan wrote: >> [1] Of course, 320x108 chars /is/ with a 42-inch TV as a monitor, but >> it's not exactly tiny print, either. I sit farther away from it than >> many people sit from their monitor. But even half of that is 160 >> chars width, which is what I used to use on my 21-inch. > > Now 160 sounds like two perfectly legible terminals side by side with 80 > chars each. ;) > > > I tend to like agreeing with others ;)
I have 2 30" monitors running KDE and I often run Konsole in a window 1280 in width but this is really to enable me to easily split tmux panes (terminal on left, log on right). As such 80 (79 in PEP8 in Python) characters per line makes it much easier than relying upon (usually horrible) word wrapping. 120 is a thing I have seen but I think anything above that is pushing it in terms of readable. Obviously there are times when you break these rules, but most of time you can find a way not to that does not change your code or make it less optimal (for example, splitting by assigning a new variable just to break lines up, which could (prior to an optimisation stage) introduce a few opcodes that were not there before). Andrew
