On 10/15/2013 7:46 AM, Camillo Bruni wrote:
processing.org uses monospaced font, these are the art guys that have more
sense graphics
than any one this mailinglist (BTW, how many of you have visited an art school?)
Besides Smalltalk, I don't know any other language that would use proportial
fonts.
After that, anybody who really knows how to use Pharo can modify it.
The newcomer is the only one you target...
Regarding Art School. No I haven't but my father-in-law did, one of my
daughters is. Regardless, it doesn't matter. Not that either do fonts.
Has anybody involved with vim or emacs been to art school?
Two of the most used and fought over editors out there and they are as
ugly as ... Yet their ugliness doesn't deter their advocates. Why?
Because their advocates find value in what you can do with them.
I am very much in the proportional camp. I spend my day typing, and
writing in proportional fonts.
One of the nice things about Smalltalk and any higher level language in
theory is that it brings you somewhat closer to natural language. And in
general most things we do in our natural languages is in a proportional
font. And no, I don't believe we need a cognitive indicator which tells
our brain that this is different. We are writing software not an article.
Once upon a time all or almost everything done on a computer was in a
monospace font. Regardless as to whether or not it was writing software
or writing a novel.
People who like monospace often prefer underscores and not camelCase.
They also like 79 character line breaks and all other sorts of
conventions created due to the environment they operate in.
Other languages do not have fonts. They generally do not have editors.
They are quite different from the Smalltalk experience. We should not
impose their constraints into our environment. Users of those languages
choose editors. Users of those editors choose fonts. The language itself
imposes no such constraints or opinions outside of community convention.
We do not operate in any of those environments. We should not feel
compelled to impose any of those constraints.
Yes, I agree. We should not be different for different sake.
But, I find value in proportional fonts. Let me repeat that, I find
value in the proportional font. Therefore I do not believe that using a
proportional font is being different just to be different.
I and most people who are not explicitly placing themselves in this
context, coding, find them to be more readable. Are magazines,
newspapers, books, websites mainly in monospace? Most of what we read is
proportional for a reason.
Yes, anybody can change their personal use of the system and choose
monospace or proportional. There is great value in establishing a good
community standard for the image. Not necessarily a standard that is
catering to beginners current comforts. But one that is a good community
default. A default which experienced Smalltalkers find productive. Then
provide good learning tools to enable beginners to be on a path of
increasing productivity. A beginner will often stay with what they start
with for a very long time. So if our initial image is one that caters to
beginners, then they may live their a very long time. And not to their
betterment.
I think we should be comfortable with and embrace who we
(Smalltalkers/Pharo) are. Not seek to change unnecessarily to conform to
a different standard which was established based upon different criteria
and constraints which do not apply to us.
I personally do not understand how so many people find Smalltalk to be
uncomfortable or difficult. I am far from a pro Smalltalker. But I find
nothing else to be as comfortable and productive as Smalltalk/Pharo.
My only thoughts is that everybody thinks in different ways. People are
drawn to languages work like they think. And for some people Smalltalk
isn't it. I know I find many languages out there to be less than
pleasant and ugly no matter what font they use. :)
Just my opinions.
Thanks.
Jimmie
