On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>wrote:

>
> On 22.08.2009, at 10:42, Ian Trudel wrote:
>
>  The current font does not seem proportional. Can't we have a default
>> monospaced font? I'm curious to know what other thinks about this. The
>> current font seems fine as far as look is concerned but it's quite
>> traditional to use monospaced fonts when programming.
>>
>
>
> Elsewhere yes, but not in the Smalltalk tradition. Others are still
> emulating character block generators, but Smalltalk relied on a bitmapped
> display pretty much forever. I find Smalltalk code displayed in a
> character-based terminal emulator style quite ugly.
>


I agree with Bert.

Fixed-width fonts are an artifact dating back to typewriters, printers and
naive computer displays that weren't sophisticated enough to do proper
typesetting. The main reason that you prefer them is because you've been
using them for so long.

I find nicely typeset Smalltalk code using variable width fonts a pleasure
to read. These days I use variable width fonts for all programming languages
I use.

Gulik.

-- 
http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20090824/673dfc5e/attachment.htm