From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Random832 Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Spaces after periods Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 02:46:58 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20151212115202.16784.72345@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <83poy82xe0.fsf@gnu.org> <834mfj36ij.fsf@gnu.org> <83vb7y1yqg.fsf@gnu.org> <83oadq1wdq.fsf@gnu.org> <8360zrsoct.fsf@gnu.org> <83poxuli6m.fsf@gnu.org> <83h9j1dwcu.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1451461646 29499 80.91.229.3 (30 Dec 2015 07:47:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 07:47:26 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 30 08:47:17 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aEBTX-0006Nd-BO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 08:47:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51455 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aEBTW-0005EJ-QB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 02:47:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39532) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aEBTS-0005Bu-Q5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 02:47:11 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aEBTP-0001hH-KC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 02:47:10 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:59132) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aEBTP-0001fA-DZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 02:47:07 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aEBTM-0006Fh-OF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 08:47:04 +0100 Original-Received: from c-68-39-146-59.hsd1.in.comcast.net ([68.39.146.59]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 08:47:04 +0100 Original-Received: from random832 by c-68-39-146-59.hsd1.in.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 08:47:04 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 19 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-68-39-146-59.hsd1.in.comcast.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) Cancel-Lock: sha1:dcz4s5EVCQUBDRY/z5L0dUdeXaw= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:197160 Archived-At: Nikolai Weibull writes: > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 6:05 PM, John Wiegley wrote: >> I almost hate to say this, but I'm not sure this is the English >> convention anymore. A quick Google shows many, many sites that >> indicate that the modern convention is now one space, and none that >> recommend two spaces. I've even changed to one space in my e-mails, >> even, after being a long holdout for the two space rule. > > I haven’t seen a style guide that says anything other than that one > space is preferred. However, I thought the general rule was to use > two spaces to make it easy for software (oh, the continued irony of it > all) to distinguish sentence-ending periods from other periods. In Python (where two spaces is also the standard), AIUI the justifi- cation is typographical: The two-space rule was invented for monospace fonts, and code (and most default Emacs fonts) is still in monospace fonts. To the extent that it's obsolete, the reason it is obsolete is because proportional fonts are common now and it's not typographically appropriate for proportional fonts.