Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bart <bc@freeuk.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Which code style do you prefer the most?
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2025 13:57:40 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <vq4cgj$1b4k4$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> <vq4b37$1asrp$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2025 14:57:39 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="71ccf53cfd1901b67d85c65a66d0edd4";
	logging-data="1413764"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/7FwwdPcGUWVXNMqBtpUDL"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Zn9eH+x6F4GJkaENX3ICOV3ya6U=
In-Reply-To: <vq4b37$1asrp$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 3456

On 03/03/2025 13:33, Richard Harnden wrote:
> 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'm saying that even monitors designed for computer use (so with RGB 
inputs, finer shadow masks and higher line rates, including those for 
mono) were around that same aspect: 4:3 or squarer, rather than wider.

Wider ones may well have existed, but in the period I'm talking about, 
from 1980 to sometime in the 90s, they were uncommon.