The width of the line numbers (when enabled) in :hardcopy appears to be hard
coded through #define PRINT_NUMBER_WIDTH 8 in the file structs.h. It would be
preferrable to have this setting available in printoptions.
When printing small, 1-page files with <=50 lines, reserving 6 character widths
for line numbers is IMHO excessive, and in some cases it causes long lines
below 80 characters to wrap with otherwise default settings.
Suggested solution:
Add a new option to printoptions named numberwidth, which takes a non-negative
integer as parameter, and use this to set the padding of line numbers when
printing through :hardcopy. Alternatively, make :hardcopy respect the existing
option :set numberwidth. The latter would be less preferable, because that
option is not intended to affect printing. Defaults should be set so it matches
current behavior.
While the suggested solution above resolves the issue, I'd like to make some
additional suggestions on how it could be improved.
Suggested improvement:
Add the possibility to supply the parameter * to the suggested numberwidth
option in popt, which would cause the line numbers in :hardcopy to fit the
largest line number. If the largest line number is 999, 3 character widths
would be reserved for line numbers.
Suggested improvement:
Add an option to printoptions to change the padding between the line number and
the line itself.
Suggested improvement:
Provide an option to have line numbers outside the margin. Some consider it
good typographic style to leave bullets and numbers of lists outside the margin.
Here's a visual example of the suggestion:
| 12345 |# This is a line of text
^ Edge ^ Margin
As opposed to the current behavior, which would look like
| | 12345 # This is a line of text
^ Edge ^ Margin
I'd be willing to submit patches for individual parts of this report if I get
some pointers on where to start, or manage to find the necessary information
myself.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by dale.oys...@gmail.com on 3 Sep 2013 at 1:20
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
dale.oys...@gmail.comon 3 Sep 2013 at 1:20