From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: wmorgan-sup@masanjin.net (William Morgan)
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 08:58:23 -0700
Subject: [sup-talk] [PATCH] Use terminal width instead of hardcoded 80
	as the wrap length.
In-Reply-To: <1243123134-sup-8032@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <1243102667-sup-6007@r50p>
	<4c4248150905231318kab3819dw68e3a3a614241c0d@mail.gmail.com>
	<1243123134-sup-8032@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <1243439667-sup-3947@entry>

Reformatted excerpts from Ben Walton's message of 2009-05-23:
> But if you leave sup's "we dont' force wrapping" rules alone, this
> makes reading mail scroll free if your terminal is wide enough and
> doesn't change the behaviour if the terminal is narrower.  (Not that
> I'm against making it an option either.)

Seems like there are three main modes of operation that would be
desirable:

1. wrap at 80 chars;
2. wrap at current terminal width;
3. don't wrap.

(In all cases, existing line breaks in the message are left alone.)

Would a three-way toggle irritate anyone?
-- 
William <wmorgan-sup at masanjin.net>