Hi
using <pre> tags are considered a sin within the monastery, but I wanna suggest to use them when citing from perldocs and similar sources.
When displayed in a terminalš the docs already have a hard linebreak only some characters longer than <code> has, always inserting "+" breakes for these <10 chars IMHO doesn't worth it.
Please compare the readability of
The auto-increment operator has a little extra builtin magic t +o it. ... "undef" is always treated as numeric, and in particular is chan +ged to 0 before incrementing (so that a post-increment of an undef value + will return 0 rather than "undef").
The auto-increment operator has a little extra builtin magic to it.
...
"undef" is always treated as numeric, and in particular is changed to 0
before incrementing (so that a post-increment of an undef value will
return 0 rather than "undef").
if someone is concerend about font-size you might add additional <tt>
The auto-increment operator has a little extra builtin magic to it.
...
"undef" is always treated as numeric, and in particular is changed to 0
before incrementing (so that a post-increment of an undef value will
return 0 rather than "undef").
Another possibility could be to augment the chars/line number in <code> to allow easy citing of perldocs.
Cheers Rolf
1) hmm depends on the terminal-with but perldoc seem to have a min-width of 80 chars.
UPDATE: Hmm ... the line-width of perldocs seems to be a convention, it depends on the author if he wraps after 80 chars.
The synopsis of Scalar::Util is an example for bad formatting.
In reply to using <pre> tags for citing perldocs! by LanX
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |