On Oct 15, 2013, at 4:52 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> On 15 Oct 2013, at 16:35, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> 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 ;) 


> 
>> On Oct 15, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 


Reply via email to