Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] long description wrap in spells

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] long description wrap in spells
  • Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 07:56:20 -0500

On 10/17/2011 02:21 AM, Bor Kraljič wrote:
> On 16. of Oct 2011 19:04:37 Ladislav Hagara <ladislav.hagara AT unob.cz> wrote:
>>>> bash$ width=$(stty size | cut -d' ' -f2)
>>>> bash$ gaze what mpg123 | fmt -w $width -s
>>>
>>> Not that folks are rallying behind me for this, but I put that in a
>>> feature request:
>>>
>>> http://www.sourcemage.org/issues/294
>>
>> +1
>> Yea, we have 21 century, we are able to display more than 80 chars on line.
>>
>> BTW, this discussion started on Friday and almost immediately DETAILS
>> files have been scripted. What about more time to discuss ideas?

I'm not opposed to changing it, but I didn't think it was worth the
argument trying to figure out what width to set it to. 80 chars works on
everything, and yeah it's kinda lame to wrap that small for larger
terminals, it prevents us from arguing over something small.

That being said, it can be changed if we want to change it, but what do
we change it to, and then how do we deal with terminals that are
smaller? Maybe a better solution would be to have something written that
automatically wrapped the text for us, and didn't manually break lines
at all. But then I think the effort is not worth the reward, so I just
said we should stick with 80 chars so we can not get stuck arguing over it.

It's early and my brian may not be working terribly well ;)

David

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page