Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #71445 > unrolled thread

PEP 8 : Maximum line Length :

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Ganesh Pal <ganesh1pal@gmail.com> - 2014-05-13 12:37 +0530
    Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-05-13 04:52 -0700
      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-05-13 13:46 +0000
        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-05-14 08:55 +1000
          Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-05-14 12:24 +1200
        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-05-14 17:09 -0400
      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-14 22:53 +0000
        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Gary Herron <gary.herron@islandtraining.com> - 2014-05-14 17:15 -0700
        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-15 02:16 +0100
          Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-05-14 22:12 -0400
            Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-05-15 08:16 -0400
        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-05-14 19:36 -0700
          Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-05-15 12:43 +1000
            Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Johannes Bauer <dfnsonfsduifb@gmx.de> - 2014-05-15 14:32 +0200
              Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-15 16:07 +0300
                Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-05-15 23:31 +1000
                  Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-15 13:38 +0000
                    Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-05-15 23:44 +1000
                      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-15 19:29 +0000
                Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-05-15 06:53 -0700
                  Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-05-15 09:58 -0400
                    Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-05-16 00:14 +1000
                    Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-05-15 07:15 -0700
                      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-15 17:29 +0300
                        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2014-05-15 09:38 -0500
                        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-05-16 00:42 +1000
                        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-05-15 17:50 -0400
                        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-05-16 01:05 +0100
                    Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-15 17:18 +0100
                  Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-15 17:12 +0300
                    Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-05-16 00:24 +1000
                      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-15 17:36 +0300
                        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-05-16 01:03 +1000
                    Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-05-16 06:25 +0000
                      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-05-16 16:54 +1000
                      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-16 10:00 +0300
                        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-05-16 17:39 +1000
                          Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-16 12:18 +0300
                            Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-05-16 19:40 +1000
                              Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-16 13:48 +0300
                      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-05-16 17:36 +1000
                Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-05-16 00:21 +0000
              Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-05-15 23:27 +1000
                Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-05-15 06:58 -0700
                  Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-05-15 18:21 -0400
                    Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-05-15 17:06 -0700
                      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-05-16 10:21 +1000
                        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-05-15 20:03 -0700
                          Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-05-16 16:12 +1000
                      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-05-16 07:05 +0000
                  Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-05-16 02:25 +0000
              Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-05-16 09:32 +1000
          Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-05-15 03:28 +0000
            Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-05-15 20:18 -0400
          Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-15 04:44 +0100
    Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-05-13 08:09 -0400
      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-05-13 22:26 +1000
        Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-05-13 20:51 -0400
      Re: PEP 8 : Maximum line Length : Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2014-05-13 07:52 -0500

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#71445 — PEP 8 : Maximum line Length :

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi  Team ,


what would be the best way to intent the below line .

I have few lines in my program exceeding the allowed maximum line Length of
79./80 characters

Example 1 :

   p =
Subprocess.Popen(shlex.split(cmd),stdout=subprocess.PIPE,stderr=subprocess.PIPE)


Iam running pylint and it says  the above line is tool long how do I limit
it to 79 character without violating any rules

************* Module isi_corrupt
C: 14,0: Line too long (88/80)
W: 19,0: Bad indentation. Found 6 spaces, expected 8


Regards,
Ganesh

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#71474

On Tuesday, May 13, 2014 12:37:24 PM UTC+5:30, Ganesh Pal wrote:
> Hi  Team ,
> 
> 
> what would be the best way to intent the below line .
> 
> I have few lines in my program exceeding the allowed maximum line Length of 79./80 characters 
> 
> 
> Example 1 :
> 
> 
>    p = Subprocess.Popen(shlex.split(cmd),stdout=subprocess.PIPE,stderr=subprocess.PIPE)


First rule of python-list: Pay careful attention to Peter Otten.

That said...

80-character limit?!

Sheesh! A relic of the days when terminals were ASCII and 80x24

I wrote about this
http://blog.languager.org/2012/10/layout-imperative-in-functional.html

While its mostly haskell oriented, the comments are amusingly related to this
question in any language:

Comment:
  It is kind of ironic that the blog format wraps your wide code examples at 65 
  chars.

What this goes to show is that while 80 is ridiculously low by most displays today,
it is too high for many web/mailing-list fora.

Of course a standard helps in removing superfluous variations.

Still... its 2014 and 80-columns is as current and relevant as ASCII.

PS.

Last rule of python list: Always listen to Peter Otten.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71488

On Tue, 13 May 2014 04:52:26 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote:

> What this goes to show is that while 80 is ridiculously low by most
> displays today, 

Not for people who like to has two (or three, or four) windows side-by-
side. Or multiple views of the same document.


> it is too high for many web/mailing-list fora.

And smart phones. 


[...]
> PS.
> Last rule of python list: Always listen to Peter Otten.

Yes. Peter is a treasure to the community, not just for his knowledge but 
for his patience and friendliness.


-- 
Steven D'Aprano

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71512

Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> writes:

> On Tue, 13 May 2014 04:52:26 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > What this goes to show is that while 80 is ridiculously low by most
> > displays today, 
>
> Not for people who like to has two (or three, or four) windows side-by-
> side. Or multiple views of the same document.

There's also the fact that, while the capacity of monitors to display
pixels has dramatically increased in recent decades, the capacity of
human cognition to scan long lines of text has not increased at all in
that time.

The 80 character line limit is *not* driven by a limitation of computer
technology; it is driven by a limitation of human cognition. For that
reason, it remains relevant until human cognition in the general reading
population improves.

-- 
 \       “Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day; give him a |
  `\    religion, and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish.” |
_o__)                                                       —Anonymous |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71521

Ben Finney wrote:
> The 80 character line limit is *not* driven by a limitation of computer
> technology; it is driven by a limitation of human cognition. For that
> reason, it remains relevant until human cognition in the general reading
> population improves.

Another thing: Just because I may have 2048 pixes of
horizontal space available on my monitor, that doesn't
mean I want to devote all of them to displaying a
single source file.

I like to be able to put 2 or 3 source windows side
by side, or have a web browser showing documentation
alongside while I work, etc.

While the limit doesn't have to be exactly 80 chars,
something not too much bigger is a good idea for a
variety of reasons.

-- 
Greg

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71578

On 5/13/2014 6:55 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 13 May 2014 04:52:26 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote:
>>
>>> What this goes to show is that while 80 is ridiculously low by most
>>> displays today,
>>
>> Not for people who like to has two (or three, or four) windows side-by-
>> side. Or multiple views of the same document.
>
> There's also the fact that, while the capacity of monitors to display
> pixels has dramatically increased in recent decades, the capacity of
> human cognition to scan long lines of text has not increased at all in
> that time.

> The 80 character line limit is *not* driven by a limitation of computer
> technology; it is driven by a limitation of human cognition. For that
> reason, it remains relevant until human cognition in the general reading
> population improves.

I use the monitor capacity to have 2 or even 3 code windows open 
side-by-side. Really handy.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71580

In article <a3253d6a-ef89-49d5-b866-8c06a7462219@googlegroups.com>,
Rustom Mody  <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Tuesday, May 13, 2014 12:37:24 PM UTC+5:30, Ganesh Pal wrote:
>> Hi  Team ,
>>
>>
>> what would be the best way to intent the below line .
>>
>> I have few lines in my program exceeding the allowed maximum line
>Length of 79./80 characters
>>
>>
>> Example 1 :
>>
>>
>>    p =
>Subprocess.Popen(shlex.split(cmd),stdout=subprocess.PIPE,stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
>
>
>First rule of python-list: Pay careful attention to Peter Otten.
>
>That said...
>
>80-character limit?!
>
>Sheesh! A relic of the days when terminals were ASCII and 80x24

80 character was the hard limit.
The soft limit for readability is 60..65 characters.
Think about it.

Just that a language accepts
#define MASK_SEPIA_INTERNAL_BLEEDING_WASHINGTON_DC_BLACK 0x147800fa
means that it is a good idea to do so.

Groetjes Albert
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71582

On 05/14/2014 03:53 PM, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> In article <a3253d6a-ef89-49d5-b866-8c06a7462219@googlegroups.com>,
> Rustom Mody  <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, May 13, 2014 12:37:24 PM UTC+5:30, Ganesh Pal wrote:
>>> Hi  Team ,
>>>
>>>
>>> what would be the best way to intent the below line .
>>>
>>> I have few lines in my program exceeding the allowed maximum line
>> Length of 79./80 characters
>>>
>>> Example 1 :
>>>
>>>
>>>     p =
>> Subprocess.Popen(shlex.split(cmd),stdout=subprocess.PIPE,stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
>>
>>
>> First rule of python-list: Pay careful attention to Peter Otten.
>>
>> That said...
>>
>> 80-character limit?!
>>
>> Sheesh! A relic of the days when terminals were ASCII and 80x24

Which is a relic of the even older punch cards which contained one line 
of (up to) 80 characters.

Gary Herron


> 80 character was the hard limit.
> The soft limit for readability is 60..65 characters.
> Think about it.
>
> Just that a language accepts
> #define MASK_SEPIA_INTERNAL_BLEEDING_WASHINGTON_DC_BLACK 0x147800fa
> means that it is a good idea to do so.
>
> Groetjes Albert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71583

On 15/05/2014 01:15, Gary Herron wrote:
>
> Which is a relic of the even older punch cards which contained one line
> of (up to) 80 characters.
>
> Gary Herron
>

I still remember the cry of anguish when the guy in the computer 
building at (the then) Portsmouth Polytechnic dropped his cardboard box 
of punch cards that made up his end of course project.

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask 
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71584

In article <mailman.10026.1400116640.18130.python-list@python.org>,
 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> I still remember the cry of anguish when the guy in the computer 
> building at (the then) Portsmouth Polytechnic dropped his cardboard box 
> of punch cards that made up his end of course project.

That's why you punch sequence numbers in columns 73-80.  If the cards 
get out of order, just run the deck through the sorter.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71594

On 05/14/2014 10:12 PM, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article <mailman.10026.1400116640.18130.python-list@python.org>,
>   Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I still remember the cry of anguish when the guy in the computer
>> building at (the then) Portsmouth Polytechnic dropped his cardboard box
>> of punch cards that made up his end of course project.
>
> That's why you punch sequence numbers in columns 73-80.  If the cards
> get out of order, just run the deck through the sorter.
>

And of course, don't forget to increment them by 10's, so you can insert 
new cards without resequencing the remainder.

I recall having to buy two tapes, because the operators were very 
resistant to taking several boxes of cards at one shot.  (A box was 2000 
cards) At that point, the card decks were instructions to the editor, 
how to turn the version of the code on tape1 into the new version, to be 
written to tape2.  (And on every run, don't forget to reverse the lines 
describing which tape is tape1 and which is tape2.)

-- 
DaveA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71585

On Thursday, May 15, 2014 4:23:52 AM UTC+5:30, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> 
> Rustom Mody  wrote:

> >80-character limit?!
> >Sheesh! A relic of the days when terminals were ASCII and 80x24
> 
> 
> 80 character was the hard limit.
> The soft limit for readability is 60..65 characters.
> Think about it.
> 
> 
> Just that a language accepts
> #define MASK_SEPIA_INTERNAL_BLEEDING_WASHINGTON_DC_BLACK 0x147800fa
> means that it is a good idea to do so.

Yes there are fundamental but soft limits, eg
http://webtypography.net/2.1.2

And there are (semi)hard technological limits like if you post code longer 65 
chars out here it will fold at random unforeseen points.
These limits get irrelevant as the technology changes.

If any of these has any relation with the magic number '79' I'd be
curious to know.

Until then may we relegate '79' to quaint historical curiosities like: 
Continuation in 6th column, Comment is a C in 1st column, 7-72 for code
(ALONG WITH ALL CAPS CODE)?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71586

Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:

> Until then may we relegate '79' to quaint historical curiosities

Not until the general capacity of human cognition advances to make
longer lines easier to read.

We humans may be historical curiosities some day; until then, let's
continue to write our code as though humans are the ones who will be
reading it.

-- 
 \                “Stop — Drive sideways.” —detour sign, Kyushu, Japan |
  `\                                                                   |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71596

On 15.05.2014 04:43, Ben Finney wrote:
> Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> Until then may we relegate '79' to quaint historical curiosities
> 
> Not until the general capacity of human cognition advances to make
> longer lines easier to read.

I find it surprising how you can make such a claim about the whole of
humanity (!) without even feeling the need to have a pro forma study to
back it up. Also, not everything that applies to prose also equally
applies to code.

Personally I find overly narrow code (80 cols) to be much *harder* to
read than code that is 100 cols wide. Keep in mind that even if the
break is at 100 cols, lines will rarely exceed that limit. And if they
do to *understand* the code, the further down the line it is the less
important are the details usually.

I don't know why anyone would force a display issue onto everyone. It
imples the arrogant stance that every human being has the exact way of
reading and writing code. Everyone can configure her editor to what she
wants (including line breaks and such).

If people were to force pixel sizes of editor fonts, everyone would
immediately recognize what a stupid idea this would be. Even though I
could claim that the vertical formatting is all messed up when you don't
display my code with the correct font size! Ridiculous, right?

Regards,
Johannes


-- 
>> Wo hattest Du das Beben nochmal GENAU vorhergesagt?
> Zumindest nicht öffentlich!
Ah, der neueste und bis heute genialste Streich unsere großen
Kosmologen: Die Geheim-Vorhersage.
 - Karl Kaos über Rüdiger Thomas in dsa <hidbv3$om2$1@speranza.aioe.org>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71598

Johannes Bauer <dfnsonfsduifb@gmx.de>:

> I don't know why anyone would force a display issue onto everyone.

Well, if I have to work with your code, you are forcing your style on
me.

> It imples the arrogant stance that every human being has the exact way
> of reading and writing code. Everyone can configure her editor to what
> she wants (including line breaks and such).

That's a good point: why aren't we just exchanging AST's and configuring
the editor to display them in our preferred format?

Well, we're not there yet.

Objective readability is not the main issue here, IMO. It's the screen
estate. I know the idea of "windows" is fast disappearing from modern
("mobile") computing; you have "apps" instead that commandeer the whole
screen. Personally, I find that a big step backwards. I want to be able
to subdivide the screen for many windows that represent different
contexts and tasks.


Marko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71600

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> wrote:
> I know the idea of "windows" is fast disappearing from modern
> ("mobile") computing; you have "apps" instead that commandeer the whole
> screen. Personally, I find that a big step backwards. I want to be able
> to subdivide the screen for many windows that represent different
> contexts and tasks.

Duh! :)

I'm currently working on Sikorsky (all my computers have names, of
course), with six Xfce workspaces. On those, my text editor (SciTE)
and MUD client (Gypsum) are set to "Always on visible workspace";
everything else is whereever I choose to put it (VMs on workspace 2,
most of my primary activity on workspace 3, Alice: Madness Returns on
workspace 6, etc). Each workspace is subdivided into approximately
five million terminal windows, because that's what I do everything
with :) One web browser window, or maybe two; occasional other stuff;
but mainly, lots and lots of terminals. I can't imagine trying to get
any serious work done without loading up multiple consoles, some of
them SSH'd to other boxes, and being able to copy and paste between
them.

The Windows 8 / Unity / GNOME 3 model annoys me greatly. Can't get
work done like that.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71601

On Thu, 15 May 2014 23:31:44 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> The Windows 8 / Unity / GNOME 3 model annoys me greatly. Can't get work
> done like that.
> 
> ChrisA
Windows 8/ Unity/ Gnome 3 are great on tablets (at least they look like 
they should be the only one I can confirm is Win 8) but lousy on a full 
pc with keyboard (Mouse optional)

I am with you & use either LXDE or XFCE or run level 3 on all of my 
systems.





-- 
Q: What do you call 50 Microsoft products at the bottom of the ocean?
A: A darned good start. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71602

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:38 PM, alister
<alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2014 23:31:44 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> The Windows 8 / Unity / GNOME 3 model annoys me greatly. Can't get work
>> done like that.
>>
>> ChrisA
> Windows 8/ Unity/ Gnome 3 are great on tablets (at least they look like
> they should be the only one I can confirm is Win 8) but lousy on a full
> pc with keyboard (Mouse optional)
>
> I am with you & use either LXDE or XFCE or run level 3 on all of my
> systems.

Sorry, I should clarify that I'm talking about desktop systems here. I
have no idea how good those UIs are on actual tablets; my beef with
them is that putting a tablet UI on a desktop is just as much a bad
idea as putting a desktop UI on a tablet. When I have a 1920x1080
display on a screen that's about a meter wide, running a single
application is seldom what I want to do.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71621

On Thu, 15 May 2014 23:44:34 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:

> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:38 PM, alister
> <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 May 2014 23:31:44 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> The Windows 8 / Unity / GNOME 3 model annoys me greatly. Can't get
>>> work done like that.
>>>
>>> ChrisA
>> Windows 8/ Unity/ Gnome 3 are great on tablets (at least they look like
>> they should be the only one I can confirm is Win 8) but lousy on a full
>> pc with keyboard (Mouse optional)
>>
>> I am with you & use either LXDE or XFCE or run level 3 on all of my
>> systems.
> 
> Sorry, I should clarify that I'm talking about desktop systems here. I
> have no idea how good those UIs are on actual tablets; my beef with them
> is that putting a tablet UI on a desktop is just as much a bad idea as
> putting a desktop UI on a tablet. When I have a 1920x1080 display on a
> screen that's about a meter wide, running a single application is seldom
> what I want to do.
> 
> ChrisA

i think i was actually agreeing with you :-)



-- 
Afternoon very favorable for romance.  Try a single person for a change.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71604

On Thursday, May 15, 2014 6:37:54 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Johannes Bauer :
> 
> 
> > I don't know why anyone would force a display issue onto everyone.
> 
> 
> Well, if I have to work with your code, you are forcing your style on
> me.
> 
> 
> > It imples the arrogant stance that every human being has the exact way
> > of reading and writing code. Everyone can configure her editor to what
> > she wants (including line breaks and such).
> 
> 
> That's a good point: why aren't we just exchanging AST's and configuring
> the editor to display them in our preferred format?
> 
> Well, we're not there yet.

Yes, regarding programmers using plain-text instead of hypertext
at http://blog.languager.org/2012/10/html-is-why-mess-in-programming-syntax.html

I wrote:

And yet programmers continue to be decades behind all other users of computers.  We continue to use flat text for our programs when all others have moved on.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web