[Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

Goubier Thierry thierry.goubier at cea.fr
Wed Oct 16 04:20:19 EDT 2013

Interesting display, Sven.

My take on that:

* Aesthetics: the system has two fonts, not one. -1 if I review a 
document with more than one font.

* Coherence / uniformity: A class name, a method selector has a 
different shape in the GUI (proportional) than in the code (monospaced). 
Are they different objects? Can I recognize my class name in the code 
without reading it?



Le 15/10/2013 21:29, Sven Van Caekenberghe a écrit :
> 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 at stfx.eu
> <mailto:sven at stfx.eu>> wrote:
>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:29, Tudor Girba <tudor at tudorgirba.com
>> <mailto:tudor at 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 at stfx.eu
>>> <mailto:sven at stfx.eu>> wrote:
>>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:estebanlm at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> On Oct 15, 2013, at 4:52 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven at stfx.eu
>>>> <mailto:sven at stfx.eu>> wrote:
>>>>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 16:35, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm at gmail.com
>>>>> <mailto: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 ;)
>>> 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 at stfx.eu
>>>>>> <mailto: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
>>>>>>> <mailto: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.
>>> --
>>> www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com>
>>> "Every thing has its own flow"

Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list