Hi Stephane!

Citerat från ducasse <ducasse at iam.unibe.ch>:
> > Well, I can understand if people want to use ":=" instead. But I
> still
> > personally think the arrow is good - it is just one character to type
> > and it is visually appealing for assignment IMHO.
> 
> My point was not that underscore is bad but that arrow is.
> because we have to tweak fonts, we do not have a clear mapping
> sometimes arrow sometimes _

Eh, it sounds like you mean that having an underscore (visually) as assignment
would be good. Eh... no, that sounds pretty strange to me. It should of course
render as an arrow - otherwise it is pointless.

And of course it is a hassle that there obviously is no arrow to the left in the
fonts of today. (I assume)
 
> > Not sure what you mean.
> I mean that I started to used the arrow for my book and then I decide 
> to use a slighty
> bigger fonts for kids and I got an underscore.....Imagine my 
> frustration to change everything

Not that it matters to the discussion - but it sounds like a "search and
replace"-thing.

> but I'm certainly too stupid because I should have just tweak all the 
> fonts (you know the normal stuff
> that you should do if you are in a cool open-source movement, the do it
> syndrome).

No, of course not. But still - you make it sounds like streamlining is always
the way to go. I don't agree. If that was the case then we would have scrapped
keyword syntax years ago because obviously all the "flies" out there use
fn(x,y)-syntax.

So we are talking about a balance here - and it is IMHO not *obvious* that the
arrow is only a bad thing. You make it sound like people who don't agree with
you are mad men... ;-)

> > I would also like to know what you meant with "we are just having fun
> > and making nothing real"? Is that a reference to my first proposal of
> a
> > Vision? Just curious.
> 
> No I like you proposal.
> 
> This is that I'm fed up that we do not pay attention to the view that 
> we give to the outside.
> I think that squeak offers an inconsistent model because of the arrow 
> for the
> reasons I enunced.

Hehe, come on now. Squeak has a completely superbly "strange" and different UI
framework and you think we would make Squeak more approachable by changing the
arrow?! :-) :-)

The people getting put off by a harmless little arrow have tuned out of Morphic
long before even getting the first browser up on the screen... :-)

> I think that the arrow glyph is one of this legacy 
> of a time where having funny bitmap was cool because they run only on 
> expensive device and screens. But now it would be good to realize that 
> this is not
> fun or ALL the fonts should be coherent and your answer about the fact 
> that you use celeste makes me feeling sad. I have the impression that 
> we are trapped in our nice cocoon (the image).

Sad?!?! I am using Squeak software and that makes you sad? That is utterly
weird. You *are* aware of the fact that it was a joke, right? I did add a smiley
IIRC.

Anyway, forget about all this and give me/us a proposal on what you want. If you
want to remove the arrow altogether and replace it with ":=" then I am at least
against it.

But I am not against any measures making both camps happy. :-)

regards, Göran

Göran Krampe, goran.krampe at bluefish.se
GSM: +46 70 3933950, http://www.bluefish.se
Smalltalk - a place where objects live, not a language.