On Wed, Oct 08, 2025 at 08:34:22AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Patrick Steinhardt [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

... but I also think we should take this
opportunity to choose the Rust defaults for Rust.  C, Perl, and text
formats like AsciiDoc do not have rigid defaults about indentation
style, tabs vs. spaces, and line length; Rust does.  We wouldn't use
tabs in Rust (the default is four spaces) because we use it everywhere
else, so I think we should take the opportunity to use the Rust defaults
here as well.

I am also slightly leaning into the direction of sticking with Rust's
default of 100 characters. It's not substantially more than 80, should
be reasonable to accommodate for in most modern setups, and sticks with
what the remainder of the ecosystem is doing.

So for now I'll leave it at 80 characters. But I don't feel strongly
about this, so if there is a majority in favor of 80 characters I'm
happy to adjust.

So the question is if we want consistency across files regardless of
what language they are written in (i.e. 80-columns everywhere) or we
treat our existing rules a "fallback rules" we have adopted while
dealing with languages without their own strict rules, and use the
default for a language with its own rule (i.e. whatever rustfmt
wants is used for Rust, our own rules still apply to everything
else)?

Consistency across files regardless of language was great, because I,
for one, prefer to use the same editor for all files regardless of
language.

I find 100 columns much worse than 80, because on my laptop I can put
three 80 columns editors next to each other (and still have a bit of
room to spare), but with 100 columns there is only room for two.

I actually am fine with the latter myself.

If people strongly prefer, I also can be talked into adopting
slightly wider limit for our fallback rules for everything else, but
that is probably a separate discussion.  It is a bit unfriendly move
against folks with aging eyeballs like myself, though.

Thanks.