I think there's some misunderstanding about what happened here, Nico... sounds like you think we just loosened the linter a bit for those truly exceptional cases the coding style allows, but I think everyone else (e.g. Patrick) thinks the new default limit for everything is now 96. That's what I'm opposed to. (Note that CB:31771 also just changed the coding style documentation.)

I am not saying that you may never ignore the linter if you have a truly exceptional case where everyone agrees not breaking lines helps readability. Many of our linter warnings have occasional false positives that we intentionally ignore anyway, and that's fine. As I said, if you want to clarify the warning text to point out the possibility of rare exceptions, I think that would be okay. (I do thing we should have some sort of warning for the default limit, though, just because it helps a lot with catching mistakes.)

But I am strongly opposed to changing the default limit and I think such a sweeping and controversial change should absolutely not be made the way it was made here.

View Change

To view, visit change 31651. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.