On Wednesday 14 Apr 2010, Vikas Rawal wrote: > > But the less than 80 character wide limitation isn't a limitation > > set by our body it was a limitation set by the older displays. > > Reading wide displays is surely more difficult that reading shorter > width displays. This, as far as I know, is a well accepted fact in > publishing industry. > > Imagine, for example, that the layout of your morning newspaper was > not divided into columns and you had each story printed in the entire > width of the newspaper. It would be impossible to read it. Even when > the size of paper allows it, the text has to be divided into columns > of shorter width.
Amazing! That was exactly the example I was about to give to Mithun before I decided that there was not enough value in my views to post :) In addition, the 80-character limit on code is a reasonable limit, both for the reason pointed out above and because length of lines of code varies a lot, with typical ones being short. For instance, on analysing ~30,000 lines of code I'd written (not including 0-length lines and comments) I find the following: Maximum length: 129 Minimum length: 1 Median length: 18 Mean length: 23 Std deviation: 21.5 (well, you can expect that to be high) So looks like even if I don't wrap at 80, the median and mean line lengths are likely to be between 20 and 30. Can I please have that 4:3 monitor now? :) Regards, -- Raju -- Raj Mathur [email protected] http://kandalaya.org/ GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F PsyTrance & Chill: http://schizoid.in/ || It is the mind that moves _______________________________________________ Ilugd mailing list [email protected] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
