undefined | Better HN

0 pointstype_enthusiast1y ago0 comments

I have to push back here a little bit. It really depends.

I mainly use Scala, and I think the majority of Scala code would be far less readable if forced to 80 columns, than if it were a larger number (or simply unconstrained).

My WFH monitor is an Apple Thunderbolt Display, which is woefully out-of-date now. Even on this display, and even though I use a much larger font than most people (16pt Hasklig), and even with a generous project/navigation/etc sidebar, I still get 180 characters. The display I have in the office is even wider, but I can't measure it right now because I'm not there.

My point is, displays are now wide enough where arbitrary line limits don't make sense. Nobody is going to cram stuff into one line unnecessarily, so just leave it up to the local decision about what makes the code most readable. If for some reason a 240-character line is more readable in some situation, then we should talk about that situation rather than why they didn't break the lines.

0 comments

fragmede1y ago

Unfortunately, while the monitor on my desk has gotten bigger, I've got this screen that I hold in my hand that's smaller than any desk monitor, and it's in portrait, not landscape mode, so while I don't write code on it, I do read code on it, so now, ideally, we'd accommodate that use case as well.

necovek1y ago

With 180 characters on your display and lines of more than 90 characters, you can't put two code windows side-by-side.

But it sure depends on the language too, though I wonder what's so peculiar about Scala to really benefit from long lines?

llm_trw1y ago

Method chaining, and a lot of it too. I honestly think it's a code smell, but some people love to do a dozen transformations in one line. You then need to make the line twice as long with .taps to debug it.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse