On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 15, 2013, at 4:52 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:

>
> On 15 Oct 2013, at 16:35, Esteban Lorenzano <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.

Smalltalk is much more than a language. �It is also a class library, an incremental/interactive development environment, a set of tools, a number of graphics systems, a system for manipulating multiple media, and so on. �Part of that is an aesthetic, especially when applied to the primary communications medium in the sytsem, text.

So the apples with tomatoes "critique" is baloney.

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.

That's wrong. �Few languages have been used to implement their own display system. �Development "in" those languages is in fact, merely editing in whatever toolset the programmer chooses and not an integral part of the language at all. �So most other languages neither use, nor don't use proportional or mono-spaced font. �They are orthogonal to fonts. �They are purely sequences of characters. �Programmers impose formatting conventions to make texts that denote programs in those languages readable. �But those languages are font-agnostic, and the conventions not integral parts of the language. �Smalltalk systems are different. �They typically implement their own tools, and hence can lay claim to coding in a particular font in a way most other systems cant; they don't do fonts.
�

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 ;)

Fuck off! �Don't tell me I'm whining. �OK, this discussion is the usual ad hominem piece of crap. �Good bye.�


>
>> On Oct 15, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
>>
>>> Excellent arguments !
>>> I am with you 100%
>>>
>>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 15:21, Igor Stasenko <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.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>





--
best,
Eliot