ok to do reformatting commits?

[Manuel M T Chakravarty]

I used to be a 80 chars kind of guy, but working with Simon on the type checker, I did get into the habit of using 120. It has stuck with me. Especially in Haskell, there is a lot of value in that additional space, especially if you like to have descriptive identifiers.

(In statement-oriented languages, 80 chars are far less limiting.)

Manuel

> Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com>:
> 
> I don’t have a strong view but like Richard I find 80 chars limiting.
> 
> I agree that we should resolve this and write down the result on the coding style page
> 
> Simon
> 
> |  -----Original Message-----
> |  From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces at haskell.org] On Behalf Of
> |  Richard Eisenberg
> |  Sent: 25 November 2015 03:23
> |  To: Evan Laforge <qdunkan at gmail.com>
> |  Cc: ghc-devs at haskell.org
> |  Subject: Re: ok to do reformatting commits?
> |  
> |  Thanks for volunteering to do this work, but I'm afraid now is a
> |  terrible time to do it. I know of three significant patches that are
> |  about to be committed, and your reformatting would cause quite a few
> |  merge conflicts. If there is a lull between a feature freeze and a
> |  ghc-8.0 fork, that would be the ideal time, to my mind.
> |  
> |  That said, I remain unconvinced that a rigid commitment to 80-char
> |  lines is in our best interest. My personal vote is to continue to have
> |  80 characters as a guideline but to keep the current practice of
> |  allowing programmer discretion.
> |  
> |  Richard
> |  
> |  On Nov 24, 2015, at 10:14 PM, Evan Laforge <qdunkan at gmail.com> wrote:
> |  
> |  > When I was doing a recent patch, I was annoyed by lint errors about
> |  >> 80 lines when I was just conforming to the existing style.  To
> |  avoid
> |  > cluttering my commit with unrelated changes, I decided to fix the
> |  > lints in a formatting-only commit afterwards.  Looking in the
> |  > archives, I see there was some recent discussion about this, but I
> |  > didn't see anyone volunteering to just go wrap a bunch of files, or
> |  > saying that they didn't want anyone to do this (usual reason being
> |  > cluttering the history, which as a rationale to not do formatting
> |  only
> |  > changes never sat too well with me).
> |  >
> |  > Would anyone mind if I went and wrapped a bunch of files, say
> |  > typecheck/*.hs?  This seems simpler than either constant hassling
> |  from
> |  > arc or coming up with more elaborate rules for arc.  I would have to
> |  > make some formatting decisions, so likely to some eyes I would be
> |  > messing some stuff up, but since there's no real standard that is
> |  > probably unavoidable.
> |  > _______________________________________________
> |  > ghc-devs mailing list
> |  > ghc-devs at haskell.org
> |  >
> |  https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fmail.h
> |  > askell.org%2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fghc-
> |  devs&data=01%7c01%7csi
> |  >
> |  monpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7c27ba726d65bd49df735d08d2f547c211%7c72
> |  >
> |  f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=iGQx%2bYYoG%2bv7xCd6Su%2bzN1L
> |  > gIjx5FxEqmWOSpIbLnjY%3d
> |  
> |  _______________________________________________
> |  ghc-devs mailing list
> |  ghc-devs at haskell.org
> |  https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fmail.h
> |  askell.org%2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fghc-
> |  devs&data=01%7c01%7csimonpj%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7c27ba726d65bd49d
> |  f735d08d2f547c211%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=iGQx%2b
> |  YYoG%2bv7xCd6Su%2bzN1LgIjx5FxEqmWOSpIbLnjY%3d
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs