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


Groups > comp.lang.python > #52432

Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List?

References (2 earlier) <CAN1F8qVh1SrZAbL62s2AxT4QV3_TiZAK7j17z4toBTDZEdiYVQ@mail.gmail.com> <5207AF15.7040604@mrabarnett.plus.com> <mailman.488.1376270824.1251.python-list@python.org> <b6rbk2F6u34U1@mid.individual.net> <52099088.7030300@gmail.com>
Date 2013-08-13 02:54 +0100
Subject Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List?
From Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Message-ID <mailman.516.1376358881.1251.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw


On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 2:48 AM, Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/11/2013 11:54 PM, Gregory Ewing wrote:
>> Michael Torrie wrote:
>>> I've always wondered if the 160 character limit or whatever it is is a
>>> hard limit in their system, or if it's just a variable they could tweak
>>> if they felt like it.
>>
>> Isn't it for compatibility with SMS? Twitter could
>> probably change it, but persuading all the cell phone
>> networks to change at the same time might be rather
>> difficult.
>
> Yes I think you're correct about it being limited for SMS.
>
> However I know of no phone or network that won't let you use longer
> messages; multiple SMS packets are used and most phone paste them back
> together.  So no there's nothing that anyone needs to change to use
> longer messages if they so chose.  It's now just an arbitrary limit,
> part of the twitter culture.

It's unlikely to be changed; the limit demands brevity. 160 may be
arbitrary now, but without strong argument for another cutoff, there's
no reason to alter it.

And that's my response, in 160 characters. :)

ChrisA

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2013-08-11 19:26 -0600
  Re: Could you verify this,   Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2013-08-12 17:54 +1200
    Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-08-13 02:54 +0100
    Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2013-08-12 19:48 -0600
    Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Jason Friedman <jsf80238@gmail.com> - 2013-08-12 21:20 -0600
    Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-08-13 04:32 +0100
    Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-08-13 09:14 +0100
    RE: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com.dmarc.invalid> - 2013-08-13 15:34 +0000
      Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-08-14 06:36 +0000

csiph-web