I too would argue that it's time to reconsider line length limits. But the reason is not monitor changes, or any particularly strong personal opinion, but changes to python:
Let's take a real life example from here <https://github.com/samuelcolvin/pydantic/blob/master/pydantic/utils.py#L246> (changed very slightly for this example), in tranitional python the signature might be: def resolve_annotations(raw_annotations, module_name): 55 characters, all fine. Now let's look at that same function in modern python with type hints: def resolve_annotations(*, raw_annotations: Dict[str, Type[Any]], module_name: Optional[str]) -> Dict[str, Type[Any]]: 119 characters! No daft 5-word variable names, just a clean (if strict) function definition. I don't see how anyone can say that would be more readable with a 80 character line limit. And that's not even an extreme case, we don't have lots of "Optional[..]" or "Tuple[ThingA, ThingB, ThingC]". Type hints (for good or bad depending on your view point) have made python code more verbose, that's just a fact. Code that used to fit on one line with 80char limit now require 120 (or more), therefore in my opinion the recommendation should change to keep up with changes in python. My preference is 120 characters (that's also the default in pycharm I believe). It works well on a desktop monitor, leaving room for a file browser and part of another window, it's also fine on a 13" laptop screen. Then again, every IDE and linter I've used (even black) allows the line length to be varried, so this is only really a problem in the standard library and libraries which adhere closely to pep8. Samuel
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
