Subject: Re: bug#32536: displayed width of man pages

From: hw <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2018 16:03:46 +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.
>
> The value nil of Man-width means to dynamically calculate the line length
> from the width of the window displaying the buffer.

Yes, I suggested this because it would not change the current default
behaviour.  If you want to change the default behaviour, I'd suggest 70
for Man-width-min and 80 for Man-width-max.