Readable Code

In the world where widescreen is now common, shouldn't readable code be pushed to 120 columns?

No.

>>1
That's hippy talk

132 columns, you mean. And it already is.

>>2
...but the world refused to change.

In the world where windowing environments are now common, shouldn't you have something more useful to put in that screen space?

You mean that some unix hipsters still abide by the laws of the 80's? Wow.

unix hipsters
I lol'd

>>7
I don't think many of them have entered the 80's yet.

Yeesh, that's pretty grim.  I'm programming a Mac
*now*, but it's running 10.5.7.  It has
``orderly'' shared memory, an application-oriented IPC
mechanism that many programs already exploit in a meaningful
way, and shared libraries -- when will the *n* different
versions of Unix get them ? 

Oh yeah, and it might not be the world's most flexible
window system, but at least you know what you get when
you're running MacOS X.

The real story is that by the time the Unix camps get
together, there will be a large portion of users out there
who will be doing hairy real-world things without the
``help'' of Unix.  Already, PCs and Macs help run
long-distance phone services and produce magazines -- not
``computer'' magazines but real magazines like Spy, Wigwag,
and the Source.

Unix is best for hacking Unix utilities.  Of course, the
Lisp Machine was a far better machine for meta-hacking.
Unix is poor choice for end-users on one hand and pure
hackers on the other...

>>4
my hardware apparently doesn't support 132-column modes... when i try to set the mode to 132x25, 132x43, 132x50, or 132x60 i get a blank screen.
so i guess i'm stuck with 80x30 (80x43, 80x50, and 80x60 also work, but require an 8x8 font instead of an 8x16 one and i haven't found any 8x8 fonts that don't look like shit).

>>10
OS X is still way behind DragonFly, Minix, and Plan 9.

>>12
Plan 9 is neither ahead nor behind anything. It has no boundaries, obeys none, and wherever it is is where everything else wishes it was.

And I do nothing in fullscreen. Windowed mode provides distraction, and distraction leads to CREATIVE EPIPHANIES.

>>1
Definitely not. Skinny columns of text are more readable. This is why newspapers use columns where not strictly necessary for layout purposes.

>>14
Yeah, text
like  this
is so much
easier  to
read.

>>1
No, but you can make full use of the extra space by having 3 files on screen at the same time instead of just two.

>>15
No, text like this is so much easier
to read. I resent your attempt to
caricature my statement, even though
as an attempt to discredit me, it
was pathetic.

People
actually
believe
this
is
easier
to
read.

T
h
i
s

i
s

t
h
e

e
a
s
i
e
s
t

t
o

r
e
a
d

I
M
H
O
.

>>19,20
Now you have two problems.

>>11
You should upgrade to a VT100.

>>21
i will if you buy me one.

>>22
if you pay me enuf ;)

So they think that by installing unix, it makes their system into a "real computer".  In fact, unix is just a minicomputer operating system (at best).  So what they end up with is a box with more MIPs than a 70s mainframe, more memory than a 70s mainframe, more disk than a 70s mainframe, and a 70s minicomputer operating system.  And it runs about as fast as a 70s minicomputer, asn supports as many users.

>>24
that's like saying that windows vista is an operating system written in assembly for 80286s.

>>25
No, it's not at all like that.

>>24
See, we can all stand united in our hatred of System V.

>>26
A fatal error occured!
Please post less often!

>>26
Why? Please enlighten us.

>>1
If your lines get longer than 80 columns then you are a bad programmer as you are obviously not able to abstract your program adequately.

>>30
Or you write in some PIG DISGUSTING bastardization of C.

>>30
I've written 180 character lines in... FIOC.

>>32
C in any language

I've written a REPL in PERL.

>>29
Because the former statement says the operating system in question is suitable only for minicomputers and is so inefficient that it makes the computer in question run like a 70s mainframe.

The latter statement says the operating system is written in assembly and designed for older computers.

Obviously these are not the same statement. Probably the poor author of the second was intending to say that the former statement refers to a version of Unix from 1988, and taking this statement as informative with regard to modern Unices is akin to treating the latter statement as one regarding Windows Vista. However the first statement still holds true.

I follow the 80-column rule. That lets me easily fit two gVim windows side-by-side on my 1920x1200 screen, using DejaVu Sans Mono 12pt. It's also easier to read, and I've had no problems with it; it's not hard to get code to fit within 80 columns, even if it means that you have to split a long expression into multiple intermediate expressions, which is good because it helps improve readability.

>>35
I thought that old minicomputer software systems had to be efficient because these minicomputers had very limited physical resources.

>>37
That's neither here nor there, as we're speaking only about modern minicomputers.

This 80 column rule, do variables count? Especally those inside of structs? Like in Java, classFoo.structFoo.fooBar? I don't generally code in Java, but in C I've had a single line of code go well past 80 columns.

>>39
Especally those inside of structs? Like in Java,
eyehibbit