Subject: bug#32536: displayed width of man pages

From: hw <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2018 04:50:29 +0200

Juri Linkov <[email-masked]> writes:

>> BTW, what is the default for the minimum length of the lines?  Is the
>> default for the maximum length the same?
>
> Like the new Man-width-max, we could also add Man-width-min as well.

I thought the line length would be determined depending on Man-width,
the new maximum width and the width of the window displaying the buffer.
That would make Man-width what specifies the minimum length:

If the width of the window suggests using a line length between
Man-width and the new maximum length, use the suggested length.
Otherwise use Man-width if the window is narrower than that, or the new
maximum length if the window is wider than the new maximum length.

Renaming Man-width to Man-width-min would make sense then, unless there
were a third option:  Always use the line length specified by
Man-width.  If this option would kick in when Man-width-min and
Man-width-max are not set, the behaviour would not change for anyone who
has set Man-width.

The default for all of them would be nil, assuming that Man-width-min
and Man-width-max do nothing when they are nil.

BTW, how come that describing Man-width says it is not documented as a
variable before man-mode has been active at least once, but its value is
known (as the value I set it to), and later used?  It seems unsave being
able to set arbitrary variables and having their values quietly accepted
without question by functions that are eventually loaded and which the
value of the variable may not have been intended for.