我需要包装长度超过72个字符的电子邮件吗？ [英] Do I need to wrap email messages longer than 72 characters in a line?

问题描述

偶尔看到代码包装电子邮件，确保单行长度不超过72个字符。是否真的需要这个，这是什么关系？

解决方案

为了扩展乔的回应，基本上72位限制允许身体被引用，所以它给添加到一行的额外的字符，例如， ：
>来自Joe Bloggs，1985年9月24日
>
> >可能有一些关于emacs的火焰vs vi，颂扬另一个。
> >引用字符在行的开头添加了四个字符，所以
> >强制包裹线条为72个字符将其推送到76个字符，而
> >影响该段的格式。
>
>有些咆哮指责乔说话，并抛出一些随机的
>证据相反。 Quote char添加2个字符。段
>格式保留。

其他人都决定在其他两个编辑器中的任何一个
中贬低pico。各方要打开这个人。 :-)

所以给一个额外的几个字符允许在80个字符的终端保留图形格式化，至少两个级别，并且可能更多地取决于如何添加/使用报价字符。

Occasionally I've seen code wrapping email messages to make sure a single line is no more than 72 characters long. Is there really need for this and what is this all about?

解决方案

To expand on Joe's response, the 72-char limit basically allows for bodies to then be quoted, so it gives room for the additional chars added to a line, e.g.,

From "scratch":
> From Joe Bloggs, 24 Sept 1985
>
> > Probably some flame about emacs vs vi, eulogising one over the other.
> > The quote chars have added four characters to the start of the line, so
> > forcing wrapped lines at 72 chars pushes this to 76 chars, without
> > affecting the formatting of the paragraph.
> 
> Some rant accusing Joe of talking crap, and throwing out some random
> evidence to the contrary. Quote char adds 2 chars. Again, paragraph
> formatting retained.

Someone else chimes in deciding to eulogise pico over either of the
other two editors. All sides about to turn on this person. :-)

So giving an extra few chars allows the parapgraph formatting to be retained on 80-character terminals, for at least two levels, and potentially more depending on how the quote characters are added/used.

这篇关于我需要包装长度超过72个字符的电子邮件吗？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！