Smalltalk › Pharo › Pharo Smalltalk Developers

default monospaced code font

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

105 messages Options

123456

Nicolas Cellier

Re: default monospaced code font

Very good comparison, thanks!

Source code pro is so disgracious to my eyes, I can't stand it.

Source code sans 10 not that bad.

But my old eyes are much more comfortable with dejaVu, even if less code fits.

2013/10/16 <[hidden email]>

Goubier Thierry wrote:

Le 16/10/2013 11:50, Sven Van Caekenberghe a écrit :

On 16 Oct 2013, at 10:20, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]> wrote:

Interesting display, Sven.

My take on that:

* Aesthetics: the system has two fonts, not one. -1 if I review a document with more than one font.

In all documents, you have at least two fonts: body and headings, often quotes, examples, listings, etc have an another font to make them stand out. In the new approach, the idea is that monospaced fonts indicate code (in browsers, debuggers, workspaces). It is a useful principle.

You're right. But nobody would dare write headings in a monospaced font :) unless for an art project.

* Coherence / uniformity: A class name, a method selector has a different shape in the GUI (proportional) than in the code (monospaced). Are they different objects? Can I recognize my class name in the code without reading it?

Syntax highlighting should take care of that I guess.

I don't think so. This is no by making the selector green that it will look more like the proportional version in the pane above.

Kind of disrupting the uniformity of the underlying model, when I'm pushing for things like smart suggestions where the GUI understands the objects written in the code.

I think that if the monospaced font is a point size smaller that the main sans font (e.g. 12 and 11) the excessive width problem or visual shock is much more manageable. In any case, I am giving it a try.

Probably. But then individual characters may become harder to read and distinguish... sort of compromising character readability to make space for the added whitespace inherent to the monospaced font.

I'd be more impressed if the argument was helping me distinguish between | and l.

Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common failings of monospaced fonts are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section is also interesting.

The attached PDFs are the result of getting the urge to compare a broad coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide to Squeak") against three fonts:
* DejaVu Sans 9 point
* Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
* Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since the width of 10 was the same as the others at 9.
Also attached is the source excel file.

cheers -ben

[1] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html
[2] http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/
[3] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html
[4] http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp

I'l let you try, then :)

Thierry

NorbertHartl

Re: default monospaced code font

Am 16.10.2013 um 21:43 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]>:

Very good comparison, thanks!
Source code pro is so disgracious to my eyes, I can't stand it.
Source code sans 10 not that bad.
But my old eyes are much more comfortable with dejaVu, even if less code fits.

+1 to every sentence

Norbert

2013/10/16 <[hidden email]>

Goubier Thierry wrote:

Le 16/10/2013 11:50, Sven Van Caekenberghe a écrit :

On 16 Oct 2013, at 10:20, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]> wrote:

Interesting display, Sven.

My take on that:

* Aesthetics: the system has two fonts, not one. -1 if I review a document with more than one font.

In all documents, you have at least two fonts: body and headings, often quotes, examples, listings, etc have an another font to make them stand out. In the new approach, the idea is that monospaced fonts indicate code (in browsers, debuggers, workspaces). It is a useful principle.

You're right. But nobody would dare write headings in a monospaced font :) unless for an art project.

* Coherence / uniformity: A class name, a method selector has a different shape in the GUI (proportional) than in the code (monospaced). Are they different objects? Can I recognize my class name in the code without reading it?

Syntax highlighting should take care of that I guess.

I don't think so. This is no by making the selector green that it will look more like the proportional version in the pane above.

Kind of disrupting the uniformity of the underlying model, when I'm pushing for things like smart suggestions where the GUI understands the objects written in the code.

I think that if the monospaced font is a point size smaller that the main sans font (e.g. 12 and 11) the excessive width problem or visual shock is much more manageable. In any case, I am giving it a try.

Probably. But then individual characters may become harder to read and distinguish... sort of compromising character readability to make space for the added whitespace inherent to the monospaced font.

I'd be more impressed if the argument was helping me distinguish between | and l.

Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common failings of monospaced fonts are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section is also interesting.

The attached PDFs are the result of getting the urge to compare a broad coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide to Squeak") against three fonts:
* DejaVu Sans 9 point
* Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
* Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since the width of 10 was the same as the others at 9.
Also attached is the source excel file.

cheers -ben

[1] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html
[2] http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/
[3] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html
[4] http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp

I'l let you try, then :)

Thierry

Goubier Thierry

Re: default monospaced code font

In reply to this post by Ben Coman

Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!

My take is:
- Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
- Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is too close) and
reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
- Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with the 2x space?)

Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this sample. In my
opinion, the best compromise density / readability.

Thierry

Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email] a écrit :

> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>> I'd be more impressed if the argument was helping me distinguish
>> between | and l.
>
> Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common failings of monospaced fonts
> are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section is also interesting.
>
> The attached PDFs are the result of getting the urge to compare a broad
> coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide to Squeak") against
> three fonts:
> * DejaVu Sans 9 point
> * Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
> * Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since the width of 10 was
> the same as the others at 9.
> Also attached is the source excel file.
>
> cheers -ben
>
> [1] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html
> [2] http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/
> [3] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html
> [4]
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp
>>
>> I'l let you try, then :)
>>
>> Thierry
>

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

Igor Stasenko

Re: default monospaced code font

In reply to this post by Eliot Miranda-2

On 16 October 2013 18:31, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Igor,

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 15 October 2013 18:36, Jimmie Houchin <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 10/15/2013 11:06 AM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote:

From: Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>

Progress is possible,

Indeed it is. And moving from proportional to mono-spaced fonts is not progress, it is regress.

perfection was not achieved in 81 or in 95.

I didn't say it was. I said that systems designed with a coherent aesthetics and philosophy are more coherent, powerful and comprehensible than those which are not.

yes, they are, I agree with that, and that's what we are trying to achieve... advancing one small step at a time, because we cannot doit all together, sadly.

What I do not see is how proportional fonts fits more with a pharo coherence (which in my pov does not exists today) than a monospaced one.

But the change is away from proportional to monospace. I think the sale must be made as to what does that actually buy us. How does this improve our experience, pharo coherence?

It seems that many of us here don't believe that it provides that coherence of UI/UX that your hoping to move us towards.

So when changing from what we have, it seems that it needs to demonstrated that the change is for the better and not neutral or worse.

I personally don't buy the it is less foreign to non-Smalltalkers argument. non-Smalltalkers would just move their distaste of Smalltalk somewhere else. Why do we have to use the image? Why can't I use Emacs, vim, Eclipse? Its all very personal and sometimes very visceral.

I have seen some visceral comments from Igor regarding Python. I could make some from the C++ I've been looking at.

ah.. python. yes, i hate their choice of using white space as part of language syntax.
That is really retarded choice.

Slurring the off-side rule with "retarded" is simply childish. I should declare that I knew and admired the inventor of the off-side rule, Peter Landin, for quite a few years at Queen Mary. And a more intelligent man you couldn't hope to meet. The off-side rule is a considered design, it is used by lots of languages, especially those in the functional tradition (e.g. Haskell and Curry), it is simple and elegant, and for people brought up in that tradition I'm sure it seems extremely natural. Like Smalltalk, these languages are concise, having a minimal ammount of supporting syntax for declarations. The off-side rule means no open and close braces, and what a field of disagreement over code aesthetics that eliminates.

"retarded"? Come on, how about some thought and criticism?

I simply don't like it. Don't treat my criticism as a constructive one. It is emotional :)

From other side, imagine that i invent rule that you should terminate statements not with period,

but with white space (lets say tab). I bet, i will find some followers in the world, who will praise my
design choice as extremely natural :)

And actually the roots of my disdain of it is same why i prefer proportional fonts:

i like text, where white space is variable and not fixed, and used to make the text more readable,
and ergonomically fit within its boundaries (like in newspaper column).

But that doesn't militate against the off-side rule (which doesn't have to be based on space count, or assuming tab with is 8, or..., simply needs to be based on the clear appearance of indentation, and there are presumably implementation choices there).

the bad thing about it that without special support in editors/tools it is going to be broken.

just for experiment try to copy and paste python code into html and see if you can read it (and don't tell me that i should put it into <pre> tag).

It is again, because in writing, white space was invented to separate words, not letters or statements or something else. For other things there is punctuation.

So, as long as we're talking about text (be it source code or not), i prefer that such rule is persisted,

and if we're talking about diagrams or some other variants of visual programming (like in sketch),
i don't care.

If for people it would be easier to read text printed with monospaced font, then it would be like that

long before first computer display appear in the world.
Therefore, the whole idea that monospaced font is more readable is moot.

Agreed.

I could justify such choice if we would have certain technical limitations (of the past), which forcing us to use

less memory and text terminals.. but we're not..

Agreed.

And please forgive my outburst the other day.

We need to be the best open source Smalltalk-like experience. And not be constrained to other languages/editors/environments constraints and views on the world.

So those who choose to advocate for a change. Advocate. Make the sale.
Or else lets not make the change.

Jimmie

--
best,
Eliot

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

Igor Stasenko

Re: default monospaced code font

In reply to this post by Goubier Thierry

hmm.. i have suspicion that it is actually adobe who can't handle the font properly..

because in some examples for source code pro font, the adjacent letters jump onto each other.
i don't believe it is that bad (see attached) Inline images 1

On 17 October 2013 09:28, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]> wrote:

Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!

My take is:
- Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
- Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is too close) and reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
- Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with the 2x space?)

Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this sample. In my opinion, the best compromise density / readability.

Thierry

Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email] a écrit :

Goubier Thierry wrote:

I'd be more impressed if the argument was helping me distinguish
between | and l.

Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common failings of monospaced fonts
are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section is also interesting.

The attached PDFs are the result of getting the urge to compare a broad
coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide to Squeak") against
three fonts:
* DejaVu Sans 9 point
* Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
* Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since the width of 10 was
the same as the others at 9.
Also attached is the source excel file.

cheers -ben

[1] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html
[2] http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/
[3] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html
[4]
http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp

I'l let you try, then :)

Thierry

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

Goubier Thierry

Re: default monospaced code font

Le 17/10/2013 10:29, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
> hmm.. i have suspicion that it is actually adobe who can't handle the
> font properly..
> because in some examples for source code pro font, the adjacent letters
> jump onto each other.
> i don't believe it is that bad (see attached)Inline images 1

Adobe or the viewer? I used evince to view it, not acrobat reader. It
may point to incorrect spacing information in Source Sans Pro (I have
not the errors you see in Source Code Pro).

Who is in charge of the Source Pro font? Which typographer? Oh, Adobe
apparently. If they can't handle it properly...

Thierry

>
> On 17 October 2013 09:28, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
> Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!
>
> My take is:
> - Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
> - Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is too close) and
> reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
> - Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with the 2x space?)
>
> Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this sample. In my
> opinion, the best compromise density / readability.
>
> Thierry
>
> Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>
> I'd be more impressed if the argument was helping me distinguish
> between | and l.
>
>
> Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common failings of
> monospaced fonts
> are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section is also
> interesting.
>
> The attached PDFs are the result of getting the urge to compare
> a broad
> coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide to Squeak")
> against
> three fonts:
> * DejaVu Sans 9 point
> * Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
> * Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since the width of
> 10 was
> the same as the others at 9.
> Also attached is the source excel file.
>
> cheers -ben
>
> [1]
> http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html
> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html>
> [2]
> http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/
> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/>
> [3]
> http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html
> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html>
> [4]
> http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp
> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp>
>
>
> I'l let you try, then :)
>
> Thierry
>
>
>
> --
> Thierry Goubier
> CEA list
> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
> France
> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko.

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

Igor Stasenko

Re: default monospaced code font

On 17 October 2013 10:47, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]> wrote:

Le 17/10/2013 10:29, Igor Stasenko a écrit :

hmm.. i have suspicion that it is actually adobe who can't handle the
font properly..
because in some examples for source code pro font, the adjacent letters
jump onto each other.
i don't believe it is that bad (see attached)Inline images 1

Adobe or the viewer? I used evince to view it, not acrobat reader. It may point to incorrect spacing information in Source Sans Pro (I have not the errors you see in Source Code Pro).

Who is in charge of the Source Pro font? Which typographer? Oh, Adobe apparently. If they can't handle it properly...

i am far from blaming adobe, just wanted to say that in my viewer it does not shows things

properly, because when rendered in pharo it don't have such problems.

so i cannot have decent comparison..

Thierry

On 17 October 2013 09:28, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!

My take is:
- Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
- Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is too close) and
reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
- Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with the 2x space?)

Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this sample. In my
opinion, the best compromise density / readability.

Thierry

Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]> a écrit :

Goubier Thierry wrote:

I'd be more impressed if the argument was helping me distinguish
between | and l.

Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common failings of
monospaced fonts
are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section is also
interesting.

The attached PDFs are the result of getting the urge to compare
a broad
coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide to Squeak")
against
three fonts:
* DejaVu Sans 9 point
* Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
* Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since the width of
10 was
the same as the others at 9.
Also attached is the source excel file.

cheers -ben

[1]
http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html
<http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html>
[2]
http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/>
[3]
http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html
<http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html>
[4]
http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp

<http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp>

I'l let you try, then :)

Thierry

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

Igor Stasenko

Re: default monospaced code font

ok i looked at .xlxslsx file

at least, in google preview it looks more or less close to the truth :)

and i can say that Source Sans Pro is a winner ( to my taste ).

I like that for 'i' in it don't closes together as in 'it', comparing to dejavu , where it does.

It reads very clear yet compact.

On 17 October 2013 10:43, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 17 October 2013 10:47, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]> wrote:

Le 17/10/2013 10:29, Igor Stasenko a écrit :

hmm.. i have suspicion that it is actually adobe who can't handle the
font properly..
because in some examples for source code pro font, the adjacent letters
jump onto each other.
i don't believe it is that bad (see attached)Inline images 1

Adobe or the viewer? I used evince to view it, not acrobat reader. It may point to incorrect spacing information in Source Sans Pro (I have not the errors you see in Source Code Pro).

Who is in charge of the Source Pro font? Which typographer? Oh, Adobe apparently. If they can't handle it properly...

i am far from blaming adobe, just wanted to say that in my viewer it does not shows things
properly, because when rendered in pharo it don't have such problems.

so i cannot have decent comparison..

Thierry

On 17 October 2013 09:28, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!

My take is:
- Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
- Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is too close) and
reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
- Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with the 2x space?)

Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this sample. In my
opinion, the best compromise density / readability.

Thierry

Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]> a écrit :

Goubier Thierry wrote:

I'd be more impressed if the argument was helping me distinguish
between | and l.

Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common failings of
monospaced fonts
are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section is also
interesting.

The attached PDFs are the result of getting the urge to compare
a broad
coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide to Squeak")
against
three fonts:
* DejaVu Sans 9 point
* Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
* Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since the width of
10 was
the same as the others at 9.
Also attached is the source excel file.

cheers -ben

[1]
http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html
<http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html>
[2]
http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/>
[3]
http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html
<http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html>
[4]
http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp

<http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp>

I'l let you try, then :)

Thierry

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

Goubier Thierry

Re: default monospaced code font

I'll do like you because...

I only managed to install the source code pro font so far (no default
install in ubuntu) and Pharo doesn't see it (LibreOffice does). I'll
look for the source sans pro download as well.

(May explain the pdf issues if the fonts are not embedded in the pdf
document).

Thierry

Le 17/10/2013 10:57, Igor Stasenko a écrit :

> ok i looked at .xlxslsx file
> at least, in google preview it looks more or less close to the truth :)
>
> and i can say that Source Sans Pro is a winner ( to my taste ).
> I like that for 'i' in it don't closes together as in 'it', comparing to
> dejavu , where it does.
> It reads very clear yet compact.
>
> On 17 October 2013 10:43, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On 17 October 2013 10:47, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>
>
> Le 17/10/2013 10:29, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
>
> hmm.. i have suspicion that it is actually adobe who can't
> handle the
> font properly..
> because in some examples for source code pro font, the
> adjacent letters
> jump onto each other.
> i don't believe it is that bad (see attached)Inline images 1
>
>
> Adobe or the viewer? I used evince to view it, not acrobat
> reader. It may point to incorrect spacing information in Source
> Sans Pro (I have not the errors you see in Source Code Pro).
>
> Who is in charge of the Source Pro font? Which typographer? Oh,
> Adobe apparently. If they can't handle it properly...
>
> i am far from blaming adobe, just wanted to say that in my viewer it
> does not shows things
> properly, because when rendered in pharo it don't have such problems.
>
> so i cannot have decent comparison..
>
> Thierry
>
>
>
> On 17 October 2013 09:28, Goubier Thierry
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
> <mailto:[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>__>> wrote:
>
> Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!
>
> My take is:
> - Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
> - Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is
> too close) and
> reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
> - Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with
> the 2x space?)
>
> Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this
> sample. In my
> opinion, the best compromise density / readability.
>
> Thierry
>
> Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>
> <mailto:[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> a écrit :
>
>
> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>
> I'd be more impressed if the argument was
> helping me distinguish
> between | and l.
>
>
> Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common failings of
> monospaced fonts
> are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section
> is also
> interesting.
>
> The attached PDFs are the result of getting the
> urge to compare
> a broad
> coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide
> to Squeak")
> against
> three fonts:
> * DejaVu Sans 9 point
> * Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
> * Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since
> the width of
> 10 was
> the same as the others at 9.
> Also attached is the source excel file.
>
> cheers -ben
>
> [1]
> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/09/source-____code-pro.html
> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html>
>
> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html
> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html>>
> [2]
> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/____files/
> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/>
>
> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/
> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/>>
> [3]
> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/08/source-____sans-pro.html
> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html>
>
> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html
> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html>>
> [4]
> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcesans.adobe/____postdownload?source=dlp
> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp>
>
>
> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp
> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp>>
>
>
> I'l let you try, then :)
>
> Thierry
>
>
>
> --
> Thierry Goubier
> CEA list
> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel
> Embarqués
> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
> France
> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko.
>
>
> --
> Thierry Goubier
> CEA list
> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
> France
> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko.

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

Ben Coman

Re: default monospaced code font

Goubier Thierry wrote:
> I'll do like you because...
>
> I only managed to install the source code pro font so far (no default
> install in ubuntu) and Pharo doesn't see it (LibreOffice does). I'll
> look for the source sans pro download as well.
>
> (May explain the pdf issues if the fonts are not embedded in the pdf
> document).
Good point. So I've made it PDF/A to embed fonts. Try attached file.
cheers -ben

>
> Thierry
>
> Le 17/10/2013 10:57, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
>> ok i looked at .xlxslsx file
>> at least, in google preview it looks more or less close to the truth :)
>>
>> and i can say that Source Sans Pro is a winner ( to my taste ).
>> I like that for 'i' in it don't closes together as in 'it', comparing to
>> dejavu , where it does.
>> It reads very clear yet compact.
>>
>> On 17 October 2013 10:43, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 17 October 2013 10:47, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 17/10/2013 10:29, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
>>
>> hmm.. i have suspicion that it is actually adobe who can't
>> handle the
>> font properly..
>> because in some examples for source code pro font, the
>> adjacent letters
>> jump onto each other.
>> i don't believe it is that bad (see attached)Inline images 1
>>
>>
>> Adobe or the viewer? I used evince to view it, not acrobat
>> reader. It may point to incorrect spacing information in Source
>> Sans Pro (I have not the errors you see in Source Code Pro).
>>
>> Who is in charge of the Source Pro font? Which typographer? Oh,
>> Adobe apparently. If they can't handle it properly...
>>
>> i am far from blaming adobe, just wanted to say that in my viewer it
>> does not shows things
>> properly, because when rendered in pharo it don't have such
>> problems.
>>
>> so i cannot have decent comparison..
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>>
>>
>> On 17 October 2013 09:28, Goubier Thierry
>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>> <mailto:[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>__>> wrote:
>>
>> Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!
>>
>> My take is:
>> - Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
>> - Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is
>> too close) and
>> reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
>> - Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with
>> the 2x space?)
>>
>> Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this
>> sample. In my
>> opinion, the best compromise density / readability.
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>> Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>
>> <mailto:[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> a écrit :
>>
>>
>> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>>
>> I'd be more impressed if the argument was
>> helping me distinguish
>> between | and l.
>>
>>
>> Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common
>> failings of
>> monospaced fonts
>> are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section
>> is also
>> interesting.
>>
>> The attached PDFs are the result of getting the
>> urge to compare
>> a broad
>> coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide
>> to Squeak")
>> against
>> three fonts:
>> * DejaVu Sans 9 point
>> * Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
>> * Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since
>> the width of
>> 10 was
>> the same as the others at 9.
>> Also attached is the source excel file.
>>
>> cheers -ben
>>
>> [1]
>>
>> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/09/source-____code-pro.html
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html>
>>
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html>>
>> [2]
>>
>> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/____files/
>>
>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/>
>>
>>
>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/
>>
>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/>>
>> [3]
>>
>> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/08/source-____sans-pro.html
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html>
>>
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html>>
>> [4]
>>
>> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcesans.adobe/____postdownload?source=dlp
>>
>>
>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp
>>
>>
>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I'l let you try, then :)
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thierry Goubier
>> CEA list
>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel
>> Embarqués
>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>> France
>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Igor Stasenko.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thierry Goubier
>> CEA list
>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>> France
>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Igor Stasenko.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Igor Stasenko.
>

Fonts-comparison-DejaVuSans9-SourceCode9-SourceSans10-embedded.pdf (224K) Download Attachment

Goubier Thierry

Re: default monospaced code font

I'm unable to double check, I now have the Source Code and Source Sans
fonts on my machine :)

And the pdfs look very nice, indeed.

Thierry

Le 17/10/2013 11:16, [hidden email] a écrit :

> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>> I'll do like you because...
>>
>> I only managed to install the source code pro font so far (no default
>> install in ubuntu) and Pharo doesn't see it (LibreOffice does). I'll
>> look for the source sans pro download as well.
>>
>> (May explain the pdf issues if the fonts are not embedded in the pdf
>> document).
> Good point. So I've made it PDF/A to embed fonts. Try attached file.
> cheers -ben
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>> Le 17/10/2013 10:57, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
>>> ok i looked at .xlxslsx file
>>> at least, in google preview it looks more or less close to the truth :)
>>>
>>> and i can say that Source Sans Pro is a winner ( to my taste ).
>>> I like that for 'i' in it don't closes together as in 'it', comparing to
>>> dejavu , where it does.
>>> It reads very clear yet compact.
>>>
>>> On 17 October 2013 10:43, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 17 October 2013 10:47, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 17/10/2013 10:29, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
>>>
>>> hmm.. i have suspicion that it is actually adobe who can't
>>> handle the
>>> font properly..
>>> because in some examples for source code pro font, the
>>> adjacent letters
>>> jump onto each other.
>>> i don't believe it is that bad (see attached)Inline images 1
>>>
>>>
>>> Adobe or the viewer? I used evince to view it, not acrobat
>>> reader. It may point to incorrect spacing information in Source
>>> Sans Pro (I have not the errors you see in Source Code Pro).
>>>
>>> Who is in charge of the Source Pro font? Which typographer? Oh,
>>> Adobe apparently. If they can't handle it properly...
>>>
>>> i am far from blaming adobe, just wanted to say that in my viewer it
>>> does not shows things
>>> properly, because when rendered in pharo it don't have such
>>> problems.
>>>
>>> so i cannot have decent comparison..
>>>
>>> Thierry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 17 October 2013 09:28, Goubier Thierry
>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>__>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!
>>>
>>> My take is:
>>> - Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
>>> - Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is
>>> too close) and
>>> reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
>>> - Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with
>>> the 2x space?)
>>>
>>> Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this
>>> sample. In my
>>> opinion, the best compromise density / readability.
>>>
>>> Thierry
>>>
>>> Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd be more impressed if the argument was
>>> helping me distinguish
>>> between | and l.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common
>>> failings of
>>> monospaced fonts
>>> are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section
>>> is also
>>> interesting.
>>>
>>> The attached PDFs are the result of getting the
>>> urge to compare
>>> a broad
>>> coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide
>>> to Squeak")
>>> against
>>> three fonts:
>>> * DejaVu Sans 9 point
>>> * Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
>>> * Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since
>>> the width of
>>> 10 was
>>> the same as the others at 9.
>>> Also attached is the source excel file.
>>>
>>> cheers -ben
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/09/source-____code-pro.html
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html>
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html>>
>>> [2]
>>> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/____files/
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/>
>>>
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/>>
>>> [3]
>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/08/source-____sans-pro.html
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html>
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html>>
>>> [4]
>>> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcesans.adobe/____postdownload?source=dlp
>>>
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp
>>>
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'l let you try, then :)
>>>
>>> Thierry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thierry Goubier
>>> CEA list
>>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel
>>> Embarqués
>>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>>> France
>>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Igor Stasenko.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thierry Goubier
>>> CEA list
>>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
>>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>>> France
>>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Igor Stasenko.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Igor Stasenko.
>>
>

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

Goubier Thierry

Re: [PROVENANCE INTERNET] Re: default monospaced code font

In reply to this post by Igor Stasenko

Once the correct fonts are installed, the pdf looks very different :)

Revised judgement:

Source code pro is not bad for a monospaced font.
Source sans pro is impressive of density (9), and has this additional
readability on DejaVu sans for the $l.

I'll take Source Sans Pro, then.

But Pharo is not seeing it in the dialog. Is that because I did a user
specific install of the fonts (and not system wide) and Pharo is not
checking the user-specific fonts?

Thierry

Le 17/10/2013 11:11, Goubier Thierry a écrit :

> I'll do like you because...
>
> I only managed to install the source code pro font so far (no default
> install in ubuntu) and Pharo doesn't see it (LibreOffice does). I'll
> look for the source sans pro download as well.
>
> (May explain the pdf issues if the fonts are not embedded in the pdf
> document).
>
> Thierry
>
> Le 17/10/2013 10:57, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
>> ok i looked at .xlxslsx file
>> at least, in google preview it looks more or less close to the truth :)
>>
>> and i can say that Source Sans Pro is a winner ( to my taste ).
>> I like that for 'i' in it don't closes together as in 'it', comparing to
>> dejavu , where it does.
>> It reads very clear yet compact.
>>
>> On 17 October 2013 10:43, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 17 October 2013 10:47, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 17/10/2013 10:29, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
>>
>> hmm.. i have suspicion that it is actually adobe who can't
>> handle the
>> font properly..
>> because in some examples for source code pro font, the
>> adjacent letters
>> jump onto each other.
>> i don't believe it is that bad (see attached)Inline images 1
>>
>>
>> Adobe or the viewer? I used evince to view it, not acrobat
>> reader. It may point to incorrect spacing information in Source
>> Sans Pro (I have not the errors you see in Source Code Pro).
>>
>> Who is in charge of the Source Pro font? Which typographer? Oh,
>> Adobe apparently. If they can't handle it properly...
>>
>> i am far from blaming adobe, just wanted to say that in my viewer it
>> does not shows things
>> properly, because when rendered in pharo it don't have such problems.
>>
>> so i cannot have decent comparison..
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>>
>>
>> On 17 October 2013 09:28, Goubier Thierry
>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>> <mailto:[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>__>> wrote:
>>
>> Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!
>>
>> My take is:
>> - Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
>> - Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is
>> too close) and
>> reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
>> - Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with
>> the 2x space?)
>>
>> Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this
>> sample. In my
>> opinion, the best compromise density / readability.
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>> Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>
>> <mailto:[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> a écrit :
>>
>>
>> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>>
>> I'd be more impressed if the argument was
>> helping me distinguish
>> between | and l.
>>
>>
>> Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common
>> failings of
>> monospaced fonts
>> are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section
>> is also
>> interesting.
>>
>> The attached PDFs are the result of getting the
>> urge to compare
>> a broad
>> coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide
>> to Squeak")
>> against
>> three fonts:
>> * DejaVu Sans 9 point
>> * Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
>> * Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since
>> the width of
>> 10 was
>> the same as the others at 9.
>> Also attached is the source excel file.
>>
>> cheers -ben
>>
>> [1]
>>
>> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/09/source-____code-pro.html
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html>
>>
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html>>
>> [2]
>>
>> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/____files/
>>
>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/>
>>
>>
>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/
>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/>>
>> [3]
>>
>> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/08/source-____sans-pro.html
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html>
>>
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html
>>
>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html>>
>> [4]
>>
>> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcesans.adobe/____postdownload?source=dlp
>>
>>
>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp
>>
>>
>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I'l let you try, then :)
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thierry Goubier
>> CEA list
>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel
>> Embarqués
>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>> France
>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Igor Stasenko.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thierry Goubier
>> CEA list
>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>> France
>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Igor Stasenko.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Igor Stasenko.
>

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

philippeback

Re: default monospaced code font

In reply to this post by Igor Stasenko

FWIW, Source Code Pro can be test driven from here:

http://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/source-code-pro

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote:

hmm.. i have suspicion that it is actually adobe who can't handle the font properly..
because in some examples for source code pro font, the adjacent letters jump onto each other.
i don't believe it is that bad (see attached)

On 17 October 2013 09:28, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]> wrote:

Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!

My take is:
- Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
- Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is too close) and reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
- Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with the 2x space?)

Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this sample. In my opinion, the best compromise density / readability.

Thierry

Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email] a écrit :

Goubier Thierry wrote:

I'd be more impressed if the argument was helping me distinguish
between | and l.

Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common failings of monospaced fonts
are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section is also interesting.

The attached PDFs are the result of getting the urge to compare a broad
coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide to Squeak") against
three fonts:
* DejaVu Sans 9 point
* Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
* Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since the width of 10 was
the same as the others at 9.
Also attached is the source excel file.

cheers -ben

[1] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html
[2] http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/
[3] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html
[4]
http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp

I'l let you try, then :)

Thierry

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

EstebanLM

Re: [PROVENANCE INTERNET] Re: default monospaced code font

In reply to this post by Goubier Thierry

On Oct 17, 2013, at 11:35 AM, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Once the correct fonts are installed, the pdf looks very different :)
>
> Revised judgement:
>
> Source code pro is not bad for a monospaced font.
> Source sans pro is impressive of density (9), and has this additional readability on DejaVu sans for the $l.
>
> I'll take Source Sans Pro, then.
>
> But Pharo is not seeing it in the dialog. Is that because I did a user specific install of the fonts (and not system wide) and Pharo is not checking the user-specific fonts?

yes, that's exactly what happens :)
but also pharo should contain those fonts (it should not need an installation)... currently I'm working on figure out why that does not work.

Esteban

>
> Thierry
>
> Le 17/10/2013 11:11, Goubier Thierry a écrit :
>> I'll do like you because...
>>
>> I only managed to install the source code pro font so far (no default
>> install in ubuntu) and Pharo doesn't see it (LibreOffice does). I'll
>> look for the source sans pro download as well.
>>
>> (May explain the pdf issues if the fonts are not embedded in the pdf
>> document).
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>> Le 17/10/2013 10:57, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
>>> ok i looked at .xlxslsx file
>>> at least, in google preview it looks more or less close to the truth :)
>>>
>>> and i can say that Source Sans Pro is a winner ( to my taste ).
>>> I like that for 'i' in it don't closes together as in 'it', comparing to
>>> dejavu , where it does.
>>> It reads very clear yet compact.
>>>
>>> On 17 October 2013 10:43, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 17 October 2013 10:47, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 17/10/2013 10:29, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
>>>
>>> hmm.. i have suspicion that it is actually adobe who can't
>>> handle the
>>> font properly..
>>> because in some examples for source code pro font, the
>>> adjacent letters
>>> jump onto each other.
>>> i don't believe it is that bad (see attached)Inline images 1
>>>
>>>
>>> Adobe or the viewer? I used evince to view it, not acrobat
>>> reader. It may point to incorrect spacing information in Source
>>> Sans Pro (I have not the errors you see in Source Code Pro).
>>>
>>> Who is in charge of the Source Pro font? Which typographer? Oh,
>>> Adobe apparently. If they can't handle it properly...
>>>
>>> i am far from blaming adobe, just wanted to say that in my viewer it
>>> does not shows things
>>> properly, because when rendered in pharo it don't have such problems.
>>>
>>> so i cannot have decent comparison..
>>>
>>> Thierry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 17 October 2013 09:28, Goubier Thierry
>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>__>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!
>>>
>>> My take is:
>>> - Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
>>> - Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is
>>> too close) and
>>> reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
>>> - Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with
>>> the 2x space?)
>>>
>>> Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this
>>> sample. In my
>>> opinion, the best compromise density / readability.
>>>
>>> Thierry
>>>
>>> Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd be more impressed if the argument was
>>> helping me distinguish
>>> between | and l.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common
>>> failings of
>>> monospaced fonts
>>> are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section
>>> is also
>>> interesting.
>>>
>>> The attached PDFs are the result of getting the
>>> urge to compare
>>> a broad
>>> coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide
>>> to Squeak")
>>> against
>>> three fonts:
>>> * DejaVu Sans 9 point
>>> * Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
>>> * Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since
>>> the width of
>>> 10 was
>>> the same as the others at 9.
>>> Also attached is the source excel file.
>>>
>>> cheers -ben
>>>
>>> [1]
>>>
>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/09/source-____code-pro.html
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html>
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html>>
>>> [2]
>>>
>>> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/____files/
>>>
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/>
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/>>
>>> [3]
>>>
>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/08/source-____sans-pro.html
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html>
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html
>>>
>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html>>
>>> [4]
>>>
>>> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcesans.adobe/____postdownload?source=dlp
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'l let you try, then :)
>>>
>>> Thierry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thierry Goubier
>>> CEA list
>>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel
>>> Embarqués
>>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>>> France
>>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Igor Stasenko.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thierry Goubier
>>> CEA list
>>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
>>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>>> France
>>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Igor Stasenko.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Igor Stasenko.
>>
>
> --
> Thierry Goubier
> CEA list
> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
> France
> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>

Henrik Sperre Johansen

Re: [PROVENANCE INTERNET] Re: default monospaced code font

On Oct 17, 2013, at 11:40 , Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:

I noticed display of fallback-fonts is broken for StrikeFonts now, (select Bitmap Deja Vu and any non-western language (or French) to have the palindrome preview X out) I guess that's not a big issue if the plan for 3.0 is embedding true type/freetype fonts in the image and removing StrikeFonts altogether though.

Cheers,
Henry

signature.asc (859 bytes) Download Attachment

Igor Stasenko

Re: [PROVENANCE INTERNET] Re: default monospaced code font

On 17 October 2013 12:02, Henrik Johansen <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Oct 17, 2013, at 11:40 , Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Oct 17, 2013, at 11:35 AM, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Once the correct fonts are installed, the pdf looks very different :)
>>
>> Revised judgement:
>>
>> Source code pro is not bad for a monospaced font.
>> Source sans pro is impressive of density (9), and has this additional readability on DejaVu sans for the $l.
>>
>> I'll take Source Sans Pro, then.
>>
>> But Pharo is not seeing it in the dialog. Is that because I did a user specific install of the fonts (and not system wide) and Pharo is not checking the user-specific fonts?
> yes, that's exactly what happens :)
> but also pharo should contain those fonts (it should not need an installation)... currently I'm working on figure out why that does not work.
>
> Esteban

I noticed display of fallback-fonts is broken for StrikeFonts now, (select Bitmap Deja Vu and any non-western language (or French) to have the palindrome preview X out) I guess that's not a big issue if the plan for 3.0 is embedding true type/freetype fonts in the image and removing StrikeFonts altogether though.

there will be a single fallback raster font (single resolution, to not take much space),

for the cases when freetype unavail.

Cheers,
Henry

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

Goubier Thierry

Re: [PROVENANCE INTERNET] Re: default monospaced code font

In reply to this post by EstebanLM

Esteban,

I'm checking with 2.0 so it may be the reason for the lack of Source
Code / Source Sans in my image :)

I'll wait for the RPackage update on 3.0 and I also have to clean my
settings for 3.0.

Thierry

Le 17/10/2013 11:40, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :

>
> On Oct 17, 2013, at 11:35 AM, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Once the correct fonts are installed, the pdf looks very different :)
>>
>> Revised judgement:
>>
>> Source code pro is not bad for a monospaced font.
>> Source sans pro is impressive of density (9), and has this additional readability on DejaVu sans for the $l.
>>
>> I'll take Source Sans Pro, then.
>>
>> But Pharo is not seeing it in the dialog. Is that because I did a user specific install of the fonts (and not system wide) and Pharo is not checking the user-specific fonts?
> yes, that's exactly what happens :)
> but also pharo should contain those fonts (it should not need an installation)... currently I'm working on figure out why that does not work.
>
> Esteban
>
>
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>> Le 17/10/2013 11:11, Goubier Thierry a écrit :
>>> I'll do like you because...
>>>
>>> I only managed to install the source code pro font so far (no default
>>> install in ubuntu) and Pharo doesn't see it (LibreOffice does). I'll
>>> look for the source sans pro download as well.
>>>
>>> (May explain the pdf issues if the fonts are not embedded in the pdf
>>> document).
>>>
>>> Thierry
>>>
>>> Le 17/10/2013 10:57, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
>>>> ok i looked at .xlxslsx file
>>>> at least, in google preview it looks more or less close to the truth :)
>>>>
>>>> and i can say that Source Sans Pro is a winner ( to my taste ).
>>>> I like that for 'i' in it don't closes together as in 'it', comparing to
>>>> dejavu , where it does.
>>>> It reads very clear yet compact.
>>>>
>>>> On 17 October 2013 10:43, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 17 October 2013 10:47, Goubier Thierry <[hidden email]
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Le 17/10/2013 10:29, Igor Stasenko a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> hmm.. i have suspicion that it is actually adobe who can't
>>>> handle the
>>>> font properly..
>>>> because in some examples for source code pro font, the
>>>> adjacent letters
>>>> jump onto each other.
>>>> i don't believe it is that bad (see attached)Inline images 1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Adobe or the viewer? I used evince to view it, not acrobat
>>>> reader. It may point to incorrect spacing information in Source
>>>> Sans Pro (I have not the errors you see in Source Code Pro).
>>>>
>>>> Who is in charge of the Source Pro font? Which typographer? Oh,
>>>> Adobe apparently. If they can't handle it properly...
>>>>
>>>> i am far from blaming adobe, just wanted to say that in my viewer it
>>>> does not shows things
>>>> properly, because when rendered in pharo it don't have such problems.
>>>>
>>>> so i cannot have decent comparison..
>>>>
>>>> Thierry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 17 October 2013 09:28, Goubier Thierry
>>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>__>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> My take is:
>>>> - Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
>>>> - Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is
>>>> too close) and
>>>> reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
>>>> - Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with
>>>> the 2x space?)
>>>>
>>>> Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this
>>>> sample. In my
>>>> opinion, the best compromise density / readability.
>>>>
>>>> Thierry
>>>>
>>>> Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email]
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'd be more impressed if the argument was
>>>> helping me distinguish
>>>> between | and l.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common
>>>> failings of
>>>> monospaced fonts
>>>> are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section
>>>> is also
>>>> interesting.
>>>>
>>>> The attached PDFs are the result of getting the
>>>> urge to compare
>>>> a broad
>>>> coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide
>>>> to Squeak")
>>>> against
>>>> three fonts:
>>>> * DejaVu Sans 9 point
>>>> * Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
>>>> * Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since
>>>> the width of
>>>> 10 was
>>>> the same as the others at 9.
>>>> Also attached is the source excel file.
>>>>
>>>> cheers -ben
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>>
>>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/09/source-____code-pro.html
>>>>
>>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/09/source-__code-pro.html
>>>>
>>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html>>
>>>> [2]
>>>>
>>>> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/____files/
>>>>
>>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/__files/
>>>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/>>
>>>> [3]
>>>>
>>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/____typblography/2012/08/source-____sans-pro.html
>>>>
>>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/__typblography/2012/08/source-__sans-pro.html
>>>>
>>>> <http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html>>
>>>> [4]
>>>>
>>>> http://sourceforge.net/____projects/sourcesans.adobe/____postdownload?source=dlp
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://sourceforge.net/__projects/sourcesans.adobe/__postdownload?source=dlp
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'l let you try, then :)
>>>>
>>>> Thierry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thierry Goubier
>>>> CEA list
>>>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel
>>>> Embarqués
>>>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>>>> France
>>>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Igor Stasenko.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thierry Goubier
>>>> CEA list
>>>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
>>>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>>>> France
>>>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Igor Stasenko.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Igor Stasenko.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Thierry Goubier
>> CEA list
>> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
>> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
>> France
>> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
>>
>
>
>
>

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

Ben Coman

Re: default monospaced code font

In reply to this post by Goubier Thierry

> what with the 2x space?

Something I like about Source Code Pro is the greater spacing between
identifiers. In comparison, I found DejaVu Sans and Source Sans Pro to
be too dense, especially so with the latter. So I experimented with
doubling the size of that space with the proportional fonts. I just
Search-Replaced <space> with <space-space>, but in an IDE you could use
one of the wider space character like the EN-QUAD [5]. Except the
performance with Unicode versus ascii characters would need to be
checked. I've attached a some more comparisons of identifier spacing.

Sorry I mislead you with the Source Sans Pro 2X-spacing in previous
PDF. You wont get that exactly out of the box without some code changes
to use a wider space character. Check you opinion against the 1X-spacing.
cheers -ben

[5] http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/chars/spaces.html

Goubier Thierry wrote:

> Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!
>
> My take is:
> - Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
> - Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is too close) and
> reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
> - Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with the 2x space?)
>
> Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this sample. In my
> opinion, the best compromise density / readability.
>
> Thierry
>
> Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email] a écrit :
>> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>>> I'd be more impressed if the argument was helping me distinguish
>>> between | and l.
>>
>> Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common failings of monospaced fonts
>> are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section is also interesting.
>>
>> The attached PDFs are the result of getting the urge to compare a broad
>> coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide to Squeak") against
>> three fonts:
>> * DejaVu Sans 9 point
>> * Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
>> * Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since the width of 10 was
>> the same as the others at 9.
>> Also attached is the source excel file.
>>
>> cheers -ben
>>
>> [1] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html
>> [2] http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/
>> [3] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html
>> [4]
>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp
>>>
>>> I'l let you try, then :)
>>>
>>> Thierry
>>
>

Fonts-comparison-SourceCode9-SourceSans10-1x-2x-embedded.pdf (208K) Download Attachment

Fonts-comparison-SourceCode9-DejaVu9-1x-2x-embedded.pdf (203K) Download Attachment

Goubier Thierry

Re: default monospaced code font

Oh, ok, thanks for the explanation.

I noticed effectively that switching to Source Sans 10 increased
significantly the density (copying the Source Sans font files in
/usr/local/share/fonts/ made them visible to Pharo), and that, it solved
the MNU on unicode glyphs as well. So all is well with the Source Sans
Pro and I'm happy.

Thierry

Le 17/10/2013 15:22, [hidden email] a écrit :

> > what with the 2x space?
>
> Something I like about Source Code Pro is the greater spacing between
> identifiers. In comparison, I found DejaVu Sans and Source Sans Pro to
> be too dense, especially so with the latter. So I experimented with
> doubling the size of that space with the proportional fonts. I just
> Search-Replaced <space> with <space-space>, but in an IDE you could use
> one of the wider space character like the EN-QUAD [5]. Except the
> performance with Unicode versus ascii characters would need to be
> checked. I've attached a some more comparisons of identifier spacing.
> Sorry I mislead you with the Source Sans Pro 2X-spacing in previous
> PDF. You wont get that exactly out of the box without some code changes
> to use a wider space character. Check you opinion against the 1X-spacing.
> cheers -ben
>
> [5] http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/chars/spaces.html
>
>
>
> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>> Excellent, I like the comparison a lot! Thanks!
>>
>> My take is:
>> - Unable to like Source Code Pro 9 (and it's so wide);
>> - Source Sans Pro 9 has spacing issues (16r, the r is too close) and
>> reading issues (it's the worse for the lL|i characters)
>> - Source sans Pro 10 is better than 9 (but what with the 2x space?)
>>
>> Overall, I'd stay with DejaVu Sans 9 based on this sample. In my
>> opinion, the best compromise density / readability.
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>> Le 16/10/2013 19:56, [hidden email] a écrit :
>>> Goubier Thierry wrote:
>>>> I'd be more impressed if the argument was helping me distinguish
>>>> between | and l.
>>>
>>> Yes. It is designed to do that. Some common failings of monospaced fonts
>>> are noted [1] and dealt with. There comment section is also interesting.
>>>
>>> The attached PDFs are the result of getting the urge to compare a broad
>>> coverage of code examples (taken from "Terse Guide to Squeak") against
>>> three fonts:
>>> * DejaVu Sans 9 point
>>> * Source Code Pro [1] [2] 9 point
>>> * Source Sans Pro [3] [4] 9 point & 10 point, since the width of 10 was
>>> the same as the others at 9.
>>> Also attached is the source excel file.
>>>
>>> cheers -ben
>>>
>>> [1] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html
>>> [2] http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/files/
>>> [3] http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html
>>> [4]
>>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/postdownload?source=dlp
>>>>
>>>> I'l let you try, then :)
>>>>
>>>> Thierry
>>>
>>
>

--
Thierry Goubier
CEA list
Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
France
Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

Ben Coman

Re: default monospaced code font

Not sure if anyone noticed this previously, but I had a problem with
Monticello repositories not showing the usual convention to bold and
underline items to indicate which were in the image - and tracked this
down to being introduced between builds #30469 and #30470. Coincidently
this is where the default font seemed to change from DejaVu to Source
Code Pro. Looks like the default is back to DejaVi in build #30497, so
I'm not sure what you'd like to do about logging this as an issue.

cheers -ben

123456