[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Docstring line length
From: |
Luc Teirlinck |
Subject: |
Re: Docstring line length |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Dec 2005 18:59:57 -0600 (CST) |
>From my earlier message:
67 for the first line. That is a given. 68 already forces an ugly
continuation line in the apropos output.
To me 70 for most subsequent lines with an absolute limit of 79 seems
better than the current 60. But I do not believe that this is a
really big deal.
I meant that whether the convention for "most" subsequent lines is no
big deal ("most" is vague anyway). I believe that more than 79 for
_any_ line is really bad and that such docstrings should definitely be
fixed. I also believe that docstrings with a first line longer than
67 should be fixed.
Sincerely,
Luc.
- Re: Legal papers for Emacs contributions, (continued)
- Re: Legal papers for Emacs contributions, Giorgos Keramidas, 2005/12/22
- Re: Legal papers for Emacs contributions, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/12/23
- Re: Docstring line length, Juri Linkov, 2005/12/22
- Re: Docstring line length, Lennart Borgman, 2005/12/22
- Re: Docstring line length, Juri Linkov, 2005/12/22
- link appearance (again) (was: RE: Docstring line length), Drew Adams, 2005/12/22
- Re: Docstring line length, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/12/22
- Re: Docstring line length, Ken Raeburn, 2005/12/20
- Re: Docstring line length, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/12/21
- Re: Docstring line length, Johan Bockgård, 2005/12/20
- Re: Docstring line length,
Luc Teirlinck <=
- Re: Docstring line length, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/12/20
- Re: Docstring line length, Bill Wohler, 2005/12/21
- RE: Docstring line length, Drew Adams, 2005/12/21
- Re: Docstring line length, Stefan Monnier, 2005/12/21
- Re: Docstring line length, David Kastrup, 2005/12/21
- Re: Docstring line length, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/12/21
Re: Docstring line length, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/12/21