[Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

Sven Van Caekenberghe sven at stfx.eu
Tue Oct 15 12:24:20 EDT 2013


On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:53, Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2013/10/15 Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm at gmail.com>:
>> 
>> On Oct 15, 2013, at 4:52 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven at stfx.eu> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 16:35, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm at 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 ;)
> 
> I started this thread because I tried the fonts and I discovered that
> something really bad happened to my eyes. Suddenly I had real problems
> to read the code. Above all it was much harder to me to see borders of
> keyword messages. Lines started to be much wider and it was harder to
> see them at once, their structure, blocks etc. Moreover, I had the
> feeling that code I'm looking at is not Smalltalk :-)
> 
> I know that it's in my brain and how easy is to change the default
> font settings. I have nothing against it if it will make Pharo more
> friendlier to newcomers and I the new icons are good. I only wanted to
> know if others the same brain disability :-) It's interesting that I
> edit Smalltalk in text files with monospaced font quite often.

Exactly, that is well put.

Pharo/Smalltalk prefers long message names, class names, etc… 
Hence being able to more on one line is a case to optimise for.

> To try the settings from the new theme eval this:
> 
> SourceCodeProRegular new install.
> OpenSansRegular new install.
> FreeTypeFontProvider current updateFromSystem.
> SourceCodeFonts setSourceCodeFonts: 10.
> 
> -- Pavel
> 
>>> 
>>>> On Oct 15, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven at stfx.eu> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Excellent arguments !
>>>>> I am with you 100%
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 15:21, Igor Stasenko <siguctua at 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.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 





More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list