I would prefer to increase the line length limit to 120 as i find it more convenient to work with. I agree with Attila here.
Thanks Shashi On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 2:05 PM Elek, Marton <e...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Thank you for details description Pifta, I like when we can talk about > well defined arguments not just about feelings. > > > I don't have very strong opinion about the line length (I learned to use > 80 as before) but I have opinion about your arguments. > > They are mostly identical to Attila's comment, but let me share it. > > As far as I understood you had 3 arguments: > > > 1. Even on wider monitor you use a setup where only 80 character can > be available > 2. Shorter lines can help to write better / cleaner code > 3. Studies about reading / typography > > > My view is somewhat different in each points: > > (1). > > The problem is with using 80, you force to use the same approach for > everybody. While you can turn on soft-wrap at any time, others couldn't > enable anything to see the code in longer lines. > > I liked this word from Attila: this is "asymmetric" > > I tested soft wrap in Intellij and it worked very well (please don't > forget to enable the "Use the original line's indent for wrapped > fragments" option). > > But what can we offer the people who prefer 120? > > (2). > > Here, I agree with Attila, again. Why I am very glad that you found a > way which helps you to create better code, for me it's harder to follow > the "naming" related 'Clean Code' suggestions. Especially it's very hard > choose meaningful name which fits in the lines and doesn't make each > expression 3-4 lines long. > > You mentioned the xxx.get()...get()....get() pattern, and I totally > agree with you to avoid it. (I think it's almost the same as > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Demeter) > > But I think it's more effective to force it with the right tools > (spotbugs/checkstyle) instead of forcing it with line length. > > > (3). Typography > > I don't think that the mentioned studies are related. They are related > to text. As far as I know the unit of the text reading is not the > characters but the words (or smaller part of the words). One limit which > can work for web pages and books (I am plus one to keep the 80 on my > Kindle) may not be true for code, where the words are longer expressions > and we can have the same amount of information with more characters. (At > least in Java. I agree that we should keep 80 for the potential Scala > classses. And limit the usable symbols per lines ;-) ) > > > Summary: > > * The problems you mentioned can be solved in different way > (soft-wrap, codestyle checs) but the problems of the group who prefer > 120 can not be solved in any other way. > > * If 80 is a personal taste and we have no strong technical arguments > against it, I think we should enable to increase it, and we can view the > code as before with our personal settings. > > > > I also suggest a small experiment: > > 1. Go to your IDE > > 2. Select a big class like OzoneManager > > 3. Change the line length to 120 > > 4. Reformat code > > 5. Start to read code > > > > Who thinks it is better that way? > > Me. I did it. It looks awesome[1]. At the beginning I wrote that I have > no strong opinion. Now I have one ;-) > > Marton > > > [1] If it's wrapped for you, please adjust "Use the original line's > indent for wrapped fragments" in the settings. > > > > > > On 5/19/20 4:14 PM, István Fajth wrote: > > Hi everyone! > > > > TLDR: > > I strongly disagree to increase the limit, you can read my reasons below, > > some are personal opinions formed based on a lot of (I think) clever > > people's thought I read/heard over time. I do not want to block the > > community to go down this way, and willing to accept the decision if that > > is to go with 120 chars per line, but I wanted to explain why I disagree, > > and also I would like to see what you think about these arguments. > > > > > > > > I have the following personal reasons: > > - in my laptop, I can have two files in IDEA splitted horizontally with a > > line length of 80, with 120 I loose this property of our source code > > - in my big monitor, I can fit 4 different files in IDEA splitted > > horizontally, or I can have my browser open beside my IDEA on the same > > screen, with line length of 80, with 120 I loose this property or at > least > > I might need horizontal scrolling in the browser > > - also if the lines are 120 characters long, for me it is harder to get > to > > the next line correctly and easily while reading if there are lines of > code > > after each other going up to the 120 limit > > - usual argument for a longer line is long type definitions, long method > > names, long parameter lists, or long accesses that spans lines with > > sthg.get.get.get.set.... like calls, same is stream.map.filter.collect > that > > might fit into 120 characters, but this drastically limits readability, > and > > is already a smell, which points to increased and probably unnecessary > > complexity in the code. > > - sometimes I also find it hard to fit in to the 80 character limit, and > I > > really don't like to wrap lines, so the limit makes me do a couple of > > things to prevent wrapping... for example: > > - check if I can extract something from the line > > - check if I can name something better to still express what it > means, > > but in a shorter form > > - check if I can simplify the code that I use, to have a shorted > access > > to the functionality > > - check if there is a simpler way of doing the same > > - check if I am too deeply nested, and whether I should extract the > > block I am in so it fits > > - if after all the above measures, the line still does not fit, I look > into > > ways of wrapping that helps the understanding of what I am trying to > > express in the code, and try to separate things visually, usually during > > this process I still find ways of simplification > > - with the 120 character limit, I think this process (as it initiates > > lazily when I reach the limit), will trigger later, leaving the longer > > lines with more complex to understand things, eventually degrading > > readability, in exchange to allow less thinking when we work on to fit > into > > the 80 characters. > > - when I read code, and I see 3-4 lines long expressions, I always > realise > > that not everyone feels the urge to fit into the 80 characters, and I > don't > > blame anyone not doing so, but still if at least a couple of us feels the > > same then I strongly believe it does worth it to limit ourselves to that > 80 > > characters, as I believe this if just by a small portion, but pushes for > a > > bit more thinking with that probably a bit more values/quality in the > > code... > > > > > > There is a scientific reason as well: > > - typography studies shows that the ideal line length for reading is > around > > 45-75 characters long, the longer the line the slower the reading, with > > increasing the line length, we make it more uncomfortable reading the > > longer lines, and with that we reduce the likelihood of the reader > reading > > through the whole line. As during most of our work, we read code, and > less > > time we write code, the readability is a property of the code that we > must > > take into account when we make these decisions... > > On this see for example: > > https://baymard.com/blog/line-length-readability > > > https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2014/09/balancing-line-length-font-size-responsive-web-design/ > > > > I also suggest a small experiment: > > 1. Go to your IDE > > 2. Select a big class like OzoneManager > > 3. Change the line length to 120 > > 4. Reformat code > > 5. Start to read code > > > > Who thinks it is better that way? (Feel free to ignore broken automatic > > wrapping and concentrate on parts where there are not too much wrapping > > after the change...) > > I don't. > > > > Pifta > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ozone-dev-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: ozone-dev-h...@hadoop.apache.org > >
