[Rake-devel] Next rake gem release
alexch at gmail.com
Sat Apr 12 12:17:34 EDT 2008
The platform checks are indeed fragile, but that's why the code is
defensive, and degrades gracefully. And an environment variable will
just substitute one brittle width (80) with another, so I'll never use
it (since I am constantly fiddling with the size of my terminal
windows), but if someone else finds it useful, then it should be
checked for first. So I agree with your 1-2-3 list, and I think the
default should not be infinite; if people want to see the whole list
they can use -D, but if they use -T it's because they want to see one
task per line for easy visual scanning.
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Jim Weirich <jim.weirich at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 12, 2008, at 12:19 AM, Alex Chaffee wrote:
> > Did you get my patch for the dynamic line endings? I didn't see a
> > reply from you on the list.
> Yes, I got the email. Thanks for the feedback. I'm definitely going to do
> something about the line length (there's been enough negative feedback on
> that choice). At the very least it will be sensitive to an environment
> variable. I'm trying to decide on whether or not to include the 'stty size'
> trick or not. The platform checks seem to me to be fragile.
> I'm thinking of checking for terminal width in this order:
> (1) Explicit environment variable
> (2) stty size output
> (3) assume 80 characters
> Open questions:
> (a) Should I bother with the stty check, given that's it is fragile and
> won't work on a significant number of platforms?
> (b) Would it be better to assume infinite width rather than 80?
> -- Jim Weirich
> -- jim.weirich at gmail.com
Alex Chaffee - Pivotal Labs
alex at PivotalLabs.com
More information about the Rake-devel