[coreboot] Who is still using a 1980's tty for coreboot development?

[Sam Kuper]

As mentioned in my earlier message in this thread, I don't have an
iron in this fire. I'm just trying to be helpful.

On 25/05/2018, Nico Huber <nico.h at gmx.de> wrote:
> So I would compromise as follows:
>
>   o Set a hard limit around 100 chars (96 would be a nice number).
>   o If a line doesn't contain a string literal, recommend a
>     visible width <= 72 chars.

This makes good sense except that it would seem to require the editing
environment to be specially configured to recognise lines with string
literals so as to be able to auto-wrap them, or to warn about them,
differently to other lines. Depending upon the text editor involved,
that might be non-trivial; I don't know.

On a more general note: I expect most people on this list are already
aware that there have been various efforts over the years to create
decent coding standards or style guides for various languages,
including conventions about line length, and to translate some of them
into text editor configuration files or linting tools for automated
feedback. For those who weren't aware, see e.g.:

http://editorconfig.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lint_(software)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnits_standards

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/process/coding-style.html

https://github.com/google/styleguide

It seems to me that sticking to a style guide that is well-supported
by text editors and linting tools would be a wise thing to do, to
minimise manual labour, human error, and development environment
configuration effort, even if it does mean occasionally needing to
manually break string literals at 80chars or suchlike.

(I'll duck out of the conversation now.)