and for PHP stuff? i would recommend 100perLine too.
but many code must be rewriten. ropu On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 4:37 AM, Ian Boston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/6/10 Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 1:52 AM, Ian Boston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> +1 for 100, (but not a committer, so not a strongly held view), > >> however > >> +1 for consistency to reduce ease of patching. > > > > > > Reduce ease of patching? :) > > Oops, increase :) > Sorry > Need caffeine. > > > > > > > >> > >> > >> Ian > >> > >> 2008/6/10 Paul Lindner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > I'm in favor of 100. I find that even with 2 char indents that we > line > >> wrap > >> > more code than I'm used to. That causes readability to suffer. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Jun 10, 2008, at 1:22 AM, Kevin Brown wrote: > >> > > >> >> Our style guide calls for 80 columns ( > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://cwiki.apache.org/SHINDIGxSITE/java-style.html#JavaStyle-Linewrapping > >> >> .) > >> >> > >> >> Unfortunately, this hasn't been followed very well, so that leaves us > >> with > >> >> two options: > >> >> > >> >> - Modify all the existing code to 80 columns. > >> >> - Up the limit to 100 columns (covers existing code, still narrow > enough > >> >> for > >> >> most terminals). > >> >> > >> >> Any strong opinions on this one? > >> > > >> > Paul Lindner > >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > -- .-. --- .--. ..- R o p u
