On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: >> We currently still have the guideline that code should fit into an 80 >> character window. But an increasing amount of the code, and code >> submissions, don't adhere to that (e.g. copy.c, which triggered me to >> write this email). And I mean outside of accepted "exceptions" like >> error messages. And there's less need for such a relatively tight limit >> these days. Perhaps we should up the guideline to 90 or 100 chars? > > Or maybe we should go the other way and get a little more rigorous > about enforcing that limit. I realize 80 has nothing on its side but > tradition, but I'm a traditionalist -- and I still do use 80 character > windows a lot of the time.
+1. FWIW, I find the non-truncation of some error messages a bit annoying when reading them. And having a 80-character makes things readable. For long URLs this enforcement makes little sense as those strings cannot be split, but more effort could be done. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers