Excellent arguments ! I am with you 100% On 15 Oct 2013, at 15:21, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> 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.
