Eighty columns is a good standard, I just think people forget how small it can be, and why it isn't always a problem. I've written tons of code that looks fantastic, if only I could use 85 columns, but rewriting it to use less just makes use of some pretty clunky constructs. All these extra "()"s and "/"s aren't actually helping make the line more readable, it just makes it fit into a rather arbitrary column limit. And at that point, you'd be thinking that the best way to make your code the most readable it can be is to use more columns.
So I don't think 80 cols is a hard limit, anymore than I think writing code in a terminal is a hard limit. I use a non-terminal text editor. I do it because it makes it easier to read code and format it how I like. I see little reason why anyone should be jumping through hoops to accommodate that. By using a terminal editor, you've already decided you won't get the best formatting, because you sacrifice the flexibility that allows it in exchange for something else. You should be expecting things to wrap around awkwardly on occasion.
Eighty columns is a good target width, but it's not worth proliferating clunky constructs to conform to. That's no better than having code wrap. (Of course, someone could also write terminal editors that allow text to go longer than 80 lines. Why are you using an editor like that if it can't do something this simple?)
Thanks again. I agree, I've written a lot of code that would be clearer in 85 cols than 80, and some code that would have been clearer in 160 cols too.
I think we're agreeing mostly.
The problem with 'ish' is that I see it as worse than useless. 80cols-ish is what? 90 cols max? Why not just use 90 cols as the standard? If I have to scroll my whole window or resize it to read your line, is that really better than if it had an extra break? Some people may think so, but I don't, personally.
Ok, cool. What I do is just put a column marker at 79, make my window 82 cols wide, and then just write it as beautifully as I can. No hard limits. Just the natural "I can't read that over there, I should maybe rewrite it."
So I don't think 80 cols is a hard limit, anymore than I think writing code in a terminal is a hard limit. I use a non-terminal text editor. I do it because it makes it easier to read code and format it how I like. I see little reason why anyone should be jumping through hoops to accommodate that. By using a terminal editor, you've already decided you won't get the best formatting, because you sacrifice the flexibility that allows it in exchange for something else. You should be expecting things to wrap around awkwardly on occasion.
Eighty columns is a good target width, but it's not worth proliferating clunky constructs to conform to. That's no better than having code wrap. (Of course, someone could also write terminal editors that allow text to go longer than 80 lines. Why are you using an editor like that if it can't do something this simple?)