From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,8143b93889fe9472
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Received: by 10.180.102.69 with SMTP id fm5mr109361wib.0.1359539513653;
        Wed, 30 Jan 2013 01:51:53 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 i11ni27804wiw.0!nntp.google.com!fu-berlin.de!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada standard and maximum line lengths
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 09:51:54 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <lyd2wnt2v9.fsf@pushface.org>
References: <8dfcf819-e1d0-4578-a795-a4bf724b5014@googlegroups.com>
	<ke55qi$59m$1@dont-email.me> <ammppjF63goU1@mid.individual.net>
	<ke69q3$vou$1@dont-email.me> <amo50dFg605U1@mid.individual.net>
	<ke6o2n$jrj$1@dont-email.me> <amo8u2Fh3ngU1@mid.individual.net>
	<ke7peh$tof$1@dont-email.me> <ampmcqFqh9aU1@mid.individual.net>
	<5107b329$0$6556$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
	<amptotFs5ouU1@mid.individual.net>
	<5107eaed$0$6566$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
	<amqdeeF1b3qU1@mid.individual.net>
	<51080c38$0$6561$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
	<amqnmtF3q45U1@mid.individual.net>
	<51085776$0$6637$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
	<ams6reFdfsdU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="c8da4aa61d590a5e477a2e03e552a940";
	logging-data="16584"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/fTpBr8lLHANLcgbb3kAorawk+gTWeQrs="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ad8P6HC7GO6O+EXprzQK5xcdGaQ=
	sha1:+/RyvmR84LGcmy+iC7t0zEZgu5U=
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: 2013-01-30T09:51:54+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> writes:

> On 13-01-30 01:12 , Georg Bauhaus wrote:

>> When GNAT started to support ISO/IEC 10646 ("universal characters"),
>> GNAT's upper bound on identifier lengths had to be lifted. Even
>> in the sense that line length implies identifier length: There
>> are names in the Unicode character database that have made the
>> source files exceeded GNAT's upper bound on line lengths (79).
>
> What "upper bound" of 79? I've certainly compiled longer lines, even
> with very early versions of GNAT. Is that limit in the GNAT style rules?

Yes.

>> I wonder what will be the effect on working in the
>> programming profession of a general limit on line
>> lengths that is, say, <= 100 characters:
>
> Two people (Dmitry and I) came out in defense of short lines, that is,
> a limit on 100 characters would not have any effect on our work.
>
> J-P. reported that code he saw, written with a line-length limit of 72
> characters, was horrible to read. On the other hand, some code that I
> have written with an 80-char limit has been praised as easy to read,
> so there are other factors that affect readability. And different
> readers have different preferences, too.

GNAT's default style limit of 79 characters has worked well for me in
major projects. I can have two Emacs frames open side-by-side.

I had one guy, who didn't get packages (I think he may have been a 'use'
advocate) who had subprograms named

   <meaningful-package-name>.<meaningful-package-name>_Do_Something

and kept running into the limit. He raised a defect 'allowed line length
too short', which I closed with 'use shorter identifiers'; his response,
I discovered afterwards, was to write 'pragma Style_Checks (Off);'. Grr.