76 columns is sane. I believe the historical motivation is that 'diff' adds
some several spaces to the left. At least I've worked for software companies
that require this maximum width in the source files for that reason.
/Snobb
On 30/11/15 07:08pm, FRIGN wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 19:04:19 +01
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 19:04:19 +0100
hiro <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> well, his concern is legit. not all terminals show 80 columns. i have
> one open right now that doesn't, so your rule is not all that matters
> on the internet. what's worse: some people send mails with more than
> 80 chars per li
well, his concern is legit. not all terminals show 80 columns. i have
one open right now that doesn't, so your rule is not all that matters
on the internet. what's worse: some people send mails with more than
80 chars per line.
this is also one of the few reasons i recommend people not to use pdf
a
Greetings.
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 17:43:02 +0100 xire.lue...@gmail.com wrote:
> Then fine, set the default as whatever width you like
> for symbol wrapping, but should that not be done
> client-side? For example, when quoting, won't the
> text be pushed out further than that hard-wrap limit?
>
> Pre
Hi,
2015-11-30 9:50 GMT+01:00, xire.lue...@gmail.com :
> Then fine, set the default as whatever width you like
> for symbol wrapping, but should that not be done
> client-side? For example, when quoting, won't the
> text be pushed out further than that hard-wrap limit?
>
> Presumably, prior to sen
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 02:50:40 -0600
wrote:
> Then fine, set the default as whatever width you like
> for symbol wrapping, but should that not be done
> client-side? For example, when quoting, won't the
> text be pushed out further than that hard-wrap limit?
>
> Presumably, prior to sending you ar
Then fine, set the default as whatever width you like
for symbol wrapping, but should that not be done
client-side? For example, when quoting, won't the
text be pushed out further than that hard-wrap limit?
Presumably, prior to sending you are still using soft
wrapping and then it adds the hard-wr
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 01:10:04 -0600
wrote:
> Apologies that you dislike my current mailer;
> where is the archive?
> And why is it netiquette to have line breaks instead
> of line wrapping client-side?
If the sender does the client wrapping, it can either
be automatic or manual, and it can be don
> And why is it netiquette to have line breaks instead
> of line wrapping client-side?
I think someone has just volunteered to submit an RFC on how to send
electronic mail between computers with a multitude of different
architectures and screen sizes on the internet in the 21st century.
Because,
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 01:10:04 -0600
xire.lue...@gmail.com wrote:
> And why is it netiquette to have line breaks instead
> of line wrapping client-side?
One more thing: Only people who use real computers to
do real work will notice this.
If you read your mails on an iPad, of course it will just
by
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 01:10:04 -0600
xire.lue...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey Xire,
> Apologies that you dislike my current mailer;
> where is the archive?
http://lists.suckless.org/dev/
> And why is it netiquette to have line breaks instead
> of line wrapping client-side?
Because I don't want to resize
Apologies that you dislike my current mailer;
where is the archive?
And why is it netiquette to have line breaks instead
of line wrapping client-side?
XL
Omitting quotes since their format might be distasteful
to you as formatted by iOS mail.
Greetings.
> X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13B143)
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 07:24:24 +0100 xire.lue...@gmail.com wrote:
> [wrapped around for the sake of netiquette]
> For the sake of clarity/curiosity could you elaborate as to the flaws
> you find most heinous in C++? OOP languages in general? C++' implemen
For the sake of clarity/curiosity could you elaborate as to the flaws you find
most heinous in C++? OOP languages in general? C++' implementation of that?
Something else?
XL
> On 2015-11-30, at 00:07, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
>
> Greetings.
>
>> On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 07:07:38 +0
Greetings.
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 07:07:38 +0100 Rashad Kanavath
wrote:
> Thanks. Unfortunately, choosing a language and it's compiler at work is not
> an thing which one can do when working on existing project.
>
> Personally, I would stick to lisp for fun projects or C (at work) if I had
> g
kenc
Thanks. Unfortunately, choosing a language and it's compiler at work is not
an thing which one can do when working on existing project.
Personally, I would stick to lisp for fun projects or C (at work) if I had
given a choice.
On 11/29/15, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 1:
On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 12:59:32PM +0100, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
> Hello Dimitris,
>
> I saw some mails on hackers list with subject line containing "scc". Since
> then I looked into suckless page about the project. I took a wild guess
> that it is "simple c compiler"
>
> But couldn't find a
Hello Dimitris,
I saw some mails on hackers list with subject line containing "scc". Since
then I looked into suckless page about the project. I took a wild guess
that it is "simple c compiler"
But couldn't find anything in the page. So I guess it is not officially
release yet. And maybe a
> GCC C compiler is a virus, Then you are saying there is no
> alternative if I want a c or c++ compiler. ?
>
> Or is suckless planning to develop a new C compiler?
http://git.suckless.org/scc/
Most of them softwares listed on stuff that sucks has alternatives
given by suckless. There is a lot of other softwares/compilers etc..
that still sucks are not listed. this is because the list will be
endless!
I agree that. If you think the compiler or language is good enough. it
is better to upd
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 12:28:20 +0100
Rashad Kanavath wrote:
> Could anyone recommend a c++ compiler that rocks?
Could anyone recommend a brand of toilet paper that rocks?
--
FRIGN
Hello all,
Could anyone recommend a c++ compiler that rocks?
from the site i got this
"""
C Compilers
GCC is the virus which has spread into nearly every Linux distribution
and has added its language extensions to be not easily replacable. As
of 2015 it is now written in C++ and so complete suck
23 matches
Mail list logo
