October 2013 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] about your heated discussion on fonts from stef Ze wize and busy man

by Alexandre Bergel

Thanks! I will read it Alexandre On Oct 15, 2013, at 7:07 PM, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Fernando wrote an article about it: http://fernandoolivero.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/begone-translucentcolor/ > > Ben > > On Oct 15, 2013, at 11:26 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: > >> Just curious, >> What's wrong with translucent colors? >> >> Alexandre >> >>> Le 15-10-2013 Ã 16:46, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> a Ã©crit : >>> >>> Hi guys >>> >>> Two points: >>> - I'm sorry I got too busy to read the thread - when I have time for pharo I'm fighting with removing translucentColor and it explode my image. >>> I'm working on too many fronts and must close and finish some of my tasks (admininistration/team management included). >>> >>> - Pay attention not to put too much heat in your discussions. ;D >>> >>> Stef >> > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Oct. 15, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

by Paul DeBruicker

philippeback wrote > Theming Pharo dark is a major undertaking (as colors are all over in the > most erratic possible way - for fun, turn the background of controls to > nuclear green and see where that shows). And trying to lake one proved to > be non useful on 2.0 as 3.0 has everything changed already (as Ben showed > me at one point). I know this is not what you mean but in the Mac if you go to System Preferences >> Accessiblity >> Display there is a setting for 'Invert Colors' which is not awful. <http://forum.world.st/file/n4714688/Screen_Shot_2013-10-15_at_3.44.09_PM.png> -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/default-monospaced-code-font-tp4714433p4714688.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Oct. 15, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

by Martin Dias

I have been using the Source Code Pro fonts for some weeks and now I have to say that I like them a lot. At the first moment my reaction was bad but very soon I started to like them. Please give them a try. MartÃn On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:01 PM, Guillermo Polito < guillermopolito(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I like those fonts, and are actually my default setup (+ the new plain > them also) :) > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>wrote: > >> OK, so with Pavel's code I got my 3.0 image capable of showing the new >> fonts. Since I do respect those arguing in favour, I will give it a try - >> but I am still not sure why it had to change in the first place. >> >> I think the progression from Small to Medium is skipping at least one >> step (10 -> 13), here is my setup for now: >> >> >> >> On 15 Oct 2013, at 18:28, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >> >> >> On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:29, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I am in favor of using monospaced fonts for the code and sans serif fonts >> for the rest of the things. I pushed the Source Sans + Source Code fonts >> for the Moose image since half a year, and actually people like the look of >> them. I am a bit surprised to see such virulent reactions :). >> >> @Sven: the mail discussions that led to the fonts choice had you in CC >> the whole time :). >> >> >> OK, maybe a didn't pay enough attention: I knew it was about look and >> feel and (a) new font(s), I failed to register that it actually was about >> using a monospaced font. >> >> I can't belief that you are surprised about the reactions ;-) >> >> For what it is worth, I still haven't heard any solid argument for the >> change. Even if it is just aesthetics and it doesn't make a difference, >> there is still the question why we have to change. >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> >> wrote: >> >> On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Oct 15, 2013, at 4:52 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >> >> >> On 15 Oct 2013, at 16:35, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> except that it is not accurate :) >> >> - with a monospace you can have bolds and italic without problems (it is >> a decent one)... and you also can play with sizes (for example, for >> comments) >> - when you copy&paste you will lose part of your formatting no matter if >> you have a fixed font or a proportional one (is not true that you lose all >> of them... in fact I usually do not lose any) >> >> >> Sorry, but there are no sensible arguments in favour of a monospaced >> font. It is just not needed (in Smalltalk). Another way to look at it is: >> 99.99 % of the world use proportional fonts. >> >> BTW, I think whoever made this 'decision' knew it would be _very_ hard to >> get this passed ;-) >> >> Maybe we should switch to C/Java/Javascript syntax so that we do not >> scare newcomers ? Sorry, I could not resist. >> >> not taken. >> and non sense. >> idea is to welcome newcomers, not to became another language. >> Now... if font is *part* of the language, we could be talking about the >> same. But since it is not, then we are comparing apples with tomatoes. >> >> I can say that no, 99% of the world do not use proportional fonts... >> every other programing environment uses monospaced fonts. >> yeah, I know "we are different"... but we still code. Ah, no, sorry... we >> "manipulate objects", but that looks really close to coding for me. >> >> and yes... I was expecting a lot of whining (even if it was not me >> *alone* who took the decision), but I was expecting from people at least >> wait to see the fonts before start the bashing ;) >> >> >> Well, it is not 'bashing', I just totally do not agree. >> And I would like to know who else is in favour, how the decision was made. >> But I'll wait a bit for other comments. >> >> On Oct 15, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >> >> Excellent arguments ! >> I am with you 100% >> >> On 15 Oct 2013, at 15:21, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Since the days when editors was able to allow me using any fonts, i was >> always switching to variable-spaced font >> for code pane. And i am not speaking about smalltalk or pharo here, it >> was C and Pascal those days :) >> >> guess, what i would prefer in pharo? :) >> >> The bad things about getting used to monospaced fonts is that you format >> code and it looks perfect, >> but then you print it or copy/paste it somewhere else where it uses other >> font, and all your beautiful formatting are gone. >> Needless to say, that printing press was invented way before first >> computer or digital printer, and all we know about fonts came >> to us from the printing world.. and i think i would be right saying that >> before first digital printers there was not such thing as monospaced >> fonts, because it is not economically efficient: you don't want to waste >> space on front page of your newspaper by aligning glyphs to some virtual >> grid. >> More than that, it works well only if you using same font size and no >> bold/underline variants whatever.. as soon as you use variants or different >> font size, >> all the benefits of 'formatting' using monospaced font is gone. >> That means, if we employ monospaced font for code, we will be forced to >> not use bold/italic variants, or different font size (for instance, >> i would be like to play with code highlight scheme, where comments using >> different font size, or where method name uses bigger font size etc). >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Igor Stasenko. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Every thing has its own flow" >> >> >> >> >

Oct. 15, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] about your heated discussion on fonts from stef Ze wize and busy man

by Benjamin

Fernando wrote an article about it: http://fernandoolivero.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/begone-translucentcolor/ Ben On Oct 15, 2013, at 11:26 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: > Just curious, > What's wrong with translucent colors? > > Alexandre > >> Le 15-10-2013 Ã 16:46, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> a Ã©crit : >> >> Hi guys >> >> Two points: >> - I'm sorry I got too busy to read the thread - when I have time for pharo I'm fighting with removing translucentColor and it explode my image. >> I'm working on too many fronts and must close and finish some of my tasks (admininistration/team management included). >> >> - Pay attention not to put too much heat in your discussions. ;D >> >> Stef >

Oct. 15, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] about your heated discussion on fonts from stef Ze wize and busy man

by Alexandre Bergel

Just curious, What's wrong with translucent colors? Alexandre > Le 15-10-2013 Ã 16:46, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> a Ã©crit : > > Hi guys > > Two points: > - I'm sorry I got too busy to read the thread - when I have time for pharo I'm fighting with removing translucentColor and it explode my image. > I'm working on too many fronts and must close and finish some of my tasks (admininistration/team management included). > > - Pay attention not to put too much heat in your discussions. ;D > > Stef

Oct. 15, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

by Tudor Girba

I kindly disagree :). I answered the request of Sven because I felt the discussion was highly unfair towards Esteban and I just offered my relaxed support. I see little constructivism in this discussion and my actual arguments would likely not add any value at this point. Doru On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com>wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am in favor of using monospaced fonts for the code and sans serif fonts >> for the rest of the things. I pushed the Source Sans + Source Code fonts >> for the Moose image since half a year, and actually people like the look of >> them. I am a bit surprised to see such virulent reactions :). >> > > again, ad hominem. > > >> >> @Sven: the mail discussions that led to the fonts choice had you in CC >> the whole time :). >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>wrote: >> >>> >>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > On Oct 15, 2013, at 4:52 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >> >>> >> On 15 Oct 2013, at 16:35, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> except that it is not accurate :) >>> >>> >>> >>> - with a monospace you can have bolds and italic without problems >>> (it is a decent one)... and you also can play with sizes (for example, for >>> comments) >>> >>> - when you copy&paste you will lose part of your formatting no >>> matter if you have a fixed font or a proportional one (is not true that >>> you lose all of them... in fact I usually do not lose any) >>> >> >>> >> Sorry, but there are no sensible arguments in favour of a monospaced >>> font. It is just not needed (in Smalltalk). Another way to look at it is: >>> 99.99 % of the world use proportional fonts. >>> >> >>> >> BTW, I think whoever made this 'decision' knew it would be _very_ >>> hard to get this passed ;-) >>> >> >>> >> Maybe we should switch to C/Java/Javascript syntax so that we do not >>> scare newcomers ? Sorry, I could not resist. >>> > not taken. >>> > and non sense. >>> > idea is to welcome newcomers, not to became another language. >>> > Now... if font is *part* of the language, we could be talking about >>> the same. But since it is not, then we are comparing apples with tomatoes. >>> > >>> > I can say that no, 99% of the world do not use proportional fonts... >>> every other programing environment uses monospaced fonts. >>> > yeah, I know "we are different"... but we still code. Ah, no, sorry... >>> we "manipulate objects", but that looks really close to coding for me. >>> > >>> > and yes... I was expecting a lot of whining (even if it was not me >>> *alone* who took the decision), but I was expecting from people at least >>> wait to see the fonts before start the bashing ;) >>> >>> Well, it is not 'bashing', I just totally do not agree. >>> And I would like to know who else is in favour, how the decision was >>> made. >>> But I'll wait a bit for other comments. >>> >>> >>> On Oct 15, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Excellent arguments ! >>> >>>> I am with you 100% >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 15:21, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>>> Since the days when editors was able to allow me using any fonts, >>> i was always switching to variable-spaced font >>> >>>>> for code pane. And i am not speaking about smalltalk or pharo >>> here, it was C and Pascal those days :) >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> guess, what i would prefer in pharo? :) >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> The bad things about getting used to monospaced fonts is that you >>> format code and it looks perfect, >>> >>>>> but then you print it or copy/paste it somewhere else where it >>> uses other font, and all your beautiful formatting are gone. >>> >>>>> Needless to say, that printing press was invented way before first >>> computer or digital printer, and all we know about fonts came >>> >>>>> to us from the printing world.. and i think i would be right >>> saying that before first digital printers there was not such thing as >>> monospaced >>> >>>>> fonts, because it is not economically efficient: you don't want to >>> waste space on front page of your newspaper by aligning glyphs to some >>> virtual grid. >>> >>>>> More than that, it works well only if you using same font size and >>> no bold/underline variants whatever.. as soon as you use variants or >>> different font size, >>> >>>>> all the benefits of 'formatting' using monospaced font is gone. >>> >>>>> That means, if we employ monospaced font for code, we will be >>> forced to not use bold/italic variants, or different font size (for >>> instance, >>> >>>>> i would be like to play with code highlight scheme, where comments >>> using different font size, or where method name uses bigger font size etc). >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> -- >>> >>>>> Best regards, >>> >>>>> Igor Stasenko. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Every thing has its own flow" >> > > > > -- > best, > Eliot > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

Oct. 15, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Is there a Roadmap for Pharo 3.0 and Pharo 4.0

by kilon

StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote > On Oct 15, 2013, at 9:43 AM, kilon < > thekilon@.co > > wrote: > > > > did you read the vision paper that I wrote one year ago? > Because this is not like if I did not spent 3 weeks writing it. > It is not perfect and a bit too much infrastructure-orieneted but it is > there. no I have not but I would like to. Is it linked in the pharo website cause I cant find it . -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Is-there-a-Roadmap-for-Pharo-3-0-and-Pharo-4-0-tp4714… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Oct. 15, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] bug: [4993] Typing cmd+L cancel all typing and we can't undo it [Terminated]

by kilon

philippeback wrote > Don't enter that if you aren't ready to invest a couple of weeks. > TxText will change it all anyway. > > Disclaimer: I spent the couple of weeks. > > Phil Sorry don't understand what you mean . Are you referring to me ? Enter what ? -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/bug-4993-Typing-cmd-L-cancel-all-typing-and-we-can-t-… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Oct. 15, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

by phil＠highoctane.be

Nice wall of (mono|proportional) text guys... Just ship a couple of preferences files and be done with this, no? As we are talking about usability, let me tell you that having a proper dark theme (and not the Moose Retina Burner (tm) one - whiter than white, kill the remaining cells style) would do marvels. I got eye surgery in both eyes and enough white, it hurts and shows shadows with floaters, which, no matter how proportional or fixed font, makes the chars unreadable as they are behind the shadow. Here are some useful pointers to what they do at JetBrains: http://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2013/06/11/inside-darcula-look-and-feel-an-i… Theming Pharo dark is a major undertaking (as colors are all over in the most erratic possible way - for fun, turn the background of controls to nuclear green and see where that shows). And trying to lake one proved to be non useful on 2.0 as 3.0 has everything changed already (as Ben showed me at one point). But if one manages to do that, it would mean that the themes are somewhat more under control. So, WTF about fonts, what matters to me is dark stuff. (some more fuel to the fire, sorry couldn't resist). Phil

Oct. 15, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Outdated Bug [7245] Autocomplete highlighting out of sync w editor after partial match

by kilon

I still don't get it, I cant find any problem with the code completion in spotlight. What I am missing ? It refers to an editor , which editor is that ? Camillo Bruni-3 wrote > These things are all a bit hidden :( > > On 2013-10-15, at 21:22, kilon < > thekilon@.co > > wrote: >> Three issues here >> >> 1) Cant find "Partial" in code completion settings > => Complete common prefixes >> >> 2) Cant find any tool named Spotlight > => shift + enter > >> 3) Code completion no longer uses tab > => Completion settings: Popup appears with this shortcut > > > > signature.asc (457 bytes) > <http://forum.world.st/attachment/4714636/0/signature.asc> -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Outdated-Bug-7245-Autocomplete-highlighting-out-of-sy… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Oct. 15, 2013