From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:14:19 +0000
From: "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us>
Message-ID: <op.uyka0s1y0p3ku8@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [9fans] Using proportional fonts in Acme for Programming
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 45418d86-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

So, I was browsing around the other day looking at Acme resources, and I
discovered an old post from 1995 wherein someone advocated the use of
proportional fonts for programming in Acme. This surprised me, to say the
least. He even went as far as to mention that SML was the language they
were using, and had managed to get a decent indenting pattern for it that
was just as readable, without messing things up for proportional font
users.

I have to admit that I'm a bit skeptical about whether such a technique
actually works, and so, I thought I would pose some questions to you.

Firstly, how many of you using Acme for programming on a daily basis remap
your fonts so that the fixed width font is the main one that you use?

Secondly, if you do use proportional width fonts, why, and what troubles
did you encounter; what benefits did you encounter?

Thirdly, would you continue using proportional width fonts in cases like
Lisp code, where you very often see something like the following
indentation scheme, and how would you resolve these indentation problems
with proportional width fonts if you did continue to use them?

	(let ([foo bar]
	      [something else])
	  (some-func (called again)
                      (with fun indentation)
             (and yet)
             (another)))

Thanks!

	Aaron W. Hsu


--
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. -- C. S. Lewis