Edward Kmett
I find a hard 80 character line length limit to be somewhat ridiculous in this day and age. I've long since revised my personal rule of thumb upwards towards 132, if only because I can still show two windows of that side by side with no worries, along with all the IDE browsing baggage, even on a fairly crippled laptop, and I've been able to have 132 columns since I picked up my first vt220 terminal in 1984 or so.
I prefer 3 coding windows side by side. And being able to read one line at a glance is a huge advantage. The size of my urxvt is 80x77 FYI.
It seems silly _25 years later_ to still not be able to have even that much breathing room.
It is not silly. With larger monitor, I can fit more windows side by side.
Shorter lengths work very poorly in languages like C# with long LINQ queries, you tend to have verbose enough member and method names that you obtain some pretty ridiculous splits. You wind up with some similar scenarios with list compehensions in Haskell.
I know nothing about C#, and I don't care about that. In Haskell, your list comprehension would be much more readable, if you break your lines. The same as complex RE in perl code.
I'm not saying that every line should be 130+ characters long, I'm just saying that 132 characters seems like a more natural hard cut off point. -Edward Kmett -- c/* __o/* <\ * (__ */\ <