Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Which code style do you prefer the most?
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2025 13:33:27 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <vq4b37$1asrp$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vpkmq0$21php$1@dont-email.me> <vpl62m$250af$1@dont-email.me>
 <87frk10w51.fsf@onesoftnet.eu.org> <vpn8vs$2jmv1$1@dont-email.me>
 <vpn92i$86q$1@reader1.panix.com> <vpnfmn$2ksdj$1@dont-email.me>
 <vpni33$2ld5k$1@dont-email.me> <vpnrld$2mq8h$2@dont-email.me>
 <vpourn$30a9h$1@dont-email.me> <vpq1es$35inm$1@dont-email.me>
 <vpr019$3b2ld$1@dont-email.me> <20250228144442.00002037@yahoo.com>
 <868qpnw2sn.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20250303141305.00002119@yahoo.com>
 <vq47b0$19uq2$2@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: nospam.harnden@invalid.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2025 14:33:28 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="a715541201b3bdb5d97f2d539b11034e";
	logging-data="1405817"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/tSARQ+9UBV1w7soyAZRDLl1MyFCXgd2s="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0qrboQnHOsNTStxDiWMDIbgaMsw=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vq47b0$19uq2$2@dont-email.me>

On 03/03/2025 12:29, bart wrote:
> On 03/03/2025 12:13, Michael S wrote:
>> On Sun, 02 Mar 2025 13:17:12 -0800
>> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:29:29 +0000
>>>> Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> Computer terminals, back in the day, were basically square,
>>>>
>>>> My impression is that even in early days 5:4 was more common than
>>>> square.
>>>
>>> Measuring an old VGA monitor, which is pretty close to an old
>>> computer terminal, shows an aspect ratio of 3:2 (width:height).
>>> Certainly not square.
>>>
>>
>> Are you sure that you measured viewing area?
>> The references that I find on the net suggest 4:3 ratio for viewing
>> area, which makes sense, considering 4:3 ratio of pixels in VGA's main
>> graphics mode (64x480).
>>
>> 240mm x 180mm for IBM 8512 color display
>> 212mm x 155mm for IBM 8513 color display
>> 283mm x 212mm for IBM 8514 color display
> 
> It depends on the aspect ratio of the pixels. But from I remember, in 
> 640x480 mode, they were square, so the aspect of the full-frame image, 
> assuming no overscan, would be 4:3. The CRT physical aspect is harder to 
> measure (some may be masked by the enclosure for example).
> 
> Domestic TV sizes in that era (40 years ago) were also 4:3, in the UK at 
> least. And a lot of monitors would have been about the same.

For home micros; Spectrums, BBCs, C64s etc, the TV was the monitor.

> 
> (I was then developing graphics hardware with increasing resolution, but 
> one problem was finding suitable monitors, with a finer shadow mask for 
> colour, that could accommodate higher line and frame rates.
> 
> Wide-screen didn't start become popular until much later. I do remember 
> massive monitors like ones with a 5:4 display, or 1280x1024, that I had 
> to lug to trade shows.)
> 
> 
>