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.

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to