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

Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

by Guillermo Polito

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

by phil＠highoctane.be

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

Oct. 15, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] MorpgTreeMorph enable/disable?

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

thank alain. Stef On Oct 15, 2013, at 8:14 PM, plantec <alain.plantec(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi Esteban, > > Le 15 oct. 2013 Ã 18:30, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> a Ã©crit : > >> Hi, >> >> I'm working with MorphTreeMorph and I need to toggle enable/disable... and as far as I see is not implemented. >> Any idea how can I do it? > > I will have a look > cheers > Alain > > > >> >> Thanks, >> Esteban > >

Oct. 15, 2013

about your heated discussion on fonts from stef Ze wize and busy man

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

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 Sven Van Caekenberghe

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] Is there a Roadmap for Pharo 3.0 and Pharo 4.0

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

>>> >>> >> The problem is that I think we already did a lot of that vision. We need a new one. >> > > I wish all our problems were like this one :-) :) me too

Oct. 15, 2013

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

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

>> the problem with this is that we do not have a clear roadmap for Pharo4 (yet). >> How it works now is: at the beginning of a year iteration we make a list of what we want, taking into account what emerged latest year (both new possibilities opened and new/old problems that emerged). >> >> That gives us what we can more or less call a "next release road map". And is "more or less" because situation can change. For example we wanted a complete revamp of Pharo3 L&F, and we wanted also a complete migration of Morph to be rendered with Athens, and reality showed that is not achievable this year... so it will wait until next one (and that does not means at all that we stopped work on that area, just that the completion of the task will take more time than expected). >> So... what's the roadmap for Pharo4? No Idea :) >> What we already know is that we made a huge move forward in infrastructure for Pharo3 (starting by Opal, but not restrained to that), and now we want to focus in the tools (but without doing *just* that, because there are lots of tasks to do in kernel, modularization, cleanups, etc.) >> >> in general, for pharo there is a vision document that shows the long (really long) term goals. Now I do not remember where is it, but should be somewhere in the pharo site (probably not visible enough). >> > The problem is that I think we already did a lot of that vision. We need a new one. I will update it :) And I want a bootstrap and mini core and â¦. > >

Oct. 15, 2013

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

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Oct 15, 2013, at 9:43 AM, kilon <thekilon(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > I really like the idea of roadmap. In an open source project people are free > to work in anything they like , even bring new nice features of their design > as long as they don't disturb the existing code. > > But the same people, including me, or even mere users , wonder where the > software is heading. Even an exploration ship , that sets to explore new > areas has goals. I would like to see in the pharo website a roadmap not just > for 3 but even for pharo 4. I know that Stephane has given a presentation > about pharo 3 roadmap , maybe you could link those slides. > > So what is the future of pharo ? 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. Stef > > Another request for the website would be a small collection of bullet points > about what makes Pharo special, in the about section there is a very general > description of what pharo is. I would like something more concrete. I want > specific features, specific libraries. Assume that people reading this have > no idea what smalltalk is and no idea what Squeak is. 10-30 bullet points > should be a good start. No lengthy descriptions, straight to the point. > > What you feel about this ? Yes I like that idea of features and without Smalltalk and squeak ref even better. > > > > -- > 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] Outdated Bug [7245] Autocomplete highlighting out of sync w editor after partial match

by Camillo Bruni

These things are all a bit hidden :( On 2013-10-15, at 21:22, kilon <thekilon(a)yahoo.co.uk> 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

Oct. 15, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

by GOUBIER Thierry

Hi uko, I'd disagree with you :) simply because I spend a lot of time reading code... readable code, recognizable code (I use my memory when scanning code, recognizing shapes is much faster than literal reading). So I'd take seriously anybody who tells me than the switch to a monospaced font disturbs its ability to read Smalltalk code... That is per essence a usability issue and should come to no surprise to anybody of that field. And yes, I find reading github diffs (monospaced font) on my own code painfull. For one, my web browser isn't wide enough for long lines :) Regards, Thierry ________________________________ De : Pharo-dev [pharo-dev-bounces(a)lists.pharo.org] de la part de Yuriy Tymchuk [yuriy.tymchuk(a)me.com] Date d'envoi : mardi 15 octobre 2013 21:12 Ã : Pharo Development List Objet : Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font Wellâ¦ I'm for monospaces font because you can make your code look nice at last. And yes you are writing code, instructions for one of the most stupid things in the world: a computer. And no, it's not meant for people. It's good that we can make it more understandable for ourselves by giving items appropriate names, and it's good that pharo has not a lot of rules that we have to follow (language grammar). Ruby has something that makes you read a code like a prose, but when it comes to understanding you don't have any idea what of the special cases took place in that part of code. Please, don't tell that you want to read code like a newspaper. News paper is for humans only, code is used by computer. uko P.S. don't be mad, it's just my humble opinion On Oct 15, 2013, at 8:59 PM, GOUBIER Thierry <thierry.goubier(a)cea.fr<mailto:thierry.goubier@cea.fr>> wrote: It's just that changing the theme also changes the iconset in the settings at the moment, that's all. Nothing much, really. I do like what you're trying to do, and I like to see this being discussed. I do think this is an important issue and I'd like to see a more unified GUI, for one. Would make it a lot simpler to describe to newcomers instead of describing half a dozen different GUIs for doing more or less the same thing: system browser, message browser, finder, change set, packages browser, spotlight. I'm half-way through that with my Alt Browser, but it starts to take its toll on my ability to invest in it (and its complete enough for me not needing to work on it much; no itch to scratch anymore :)). Thierry ________________________________ De : Pharo-dev [pharo-dev-bounces(a)lists.pharo.org<mailto:pharo-dev-bounces@lists.pharo.org>] de la part de Esteban Lorenzano [estebanlm(a)gmail.com<mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>] Date d'envoi : mardi 15 octobre 2013 20:31 Ã : Pharo Development List Objet : Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font theme and iconset are decoupled, so yes you can :) problem is that I still didn't added the preference for choosing iconsets (my bad, didn't have the time yet). On Oct 15, 2013, at 8:19 PM, GOUBIER Thierry <thierry.goubier(a)cea.fr<mailto:thierry.goubier@cea.fr>> wrote: And can I have a setting with the - Pharo theme (not pharo3) - and the eclipse icon set ? :) (Of course I should set an issue and write a Slice, otherwise Camillo will get angry at me ;)) Thierry ________________________________ De : Pharo-dev [pharo-dev-bounces(a)lists.pharo.org<mailto:pharo-dev-bounces@lists.pharo.org>] de la part de Esteban Lorenzano [estebanlm(a)gmail.com<mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>] Date d'envoi : mardi 15 octobre 2013 20:07 Ã : Pharo Development List Objet : Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font On Oct 15, 2013, at 6:53 PM, Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2(a)btinternet.com<mailto:gazzaguru2@btinternet.com>> wrote: Sorry, not been following the thread but is there really a problem? Code font is specifiable in settings. Guess we are all just arguing about what the default may be... exactly :) Regards, Gary ----- Original Message ----- From: Nicolas Cellier<mailto:nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com> To: Pharo Development List<mailto:pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font Pushing the newcomers argument: if newcomers are used to using if then else and switch case, why did you deprecate usage caseOf:? If newcomers argument counts, shouldn't we remove text editing, browser, etc..., go back to file based development and create an eclipse (or emacs) plugin? I saw very good arguments for proportional: more readable/natural/more text on the line... So I'm inlne with Pavel, Is there any argument for fixed space (but the hypothetical newcomer). There are some times when we must educate rather than imitate. 2013/10/15 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu<mailto:sven@stfx.eu>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:29, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com<mailto:tudor@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<mailto:sven@stfx.eu>> wrote: > > On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com<mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > On Oct 15, 2013, at 4:52 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu<mailto:sven@stfx.eu>> wrote: > > > >> > >> On 15 Oct 2013, at 16:35, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com<mailto:estebanlm@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<mailto:sven@stfx.eu>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Excellent arguments ! > >>>> I am with you 100% > >>>> > >>>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 15:21, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com<mailto:siguctua@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<http://www.tudorgirba.com> > > "Every thing has its own flow"

Oct. 15, 2013