On Apr 6, 8:01 pm, Roy Smith <r...@panix.com> wrote: > What makes sense for a word processor and what makes sense for a > programming language are two very different things. > > Word processors are almost always working with blocks of running text, > set in proportional fonts, often with multiple font sizes and styles. > It is usually assumed that line breaks are ephemeral, i.e. as the text > gets edited and reformatted, lines will re-flow. > > Program text is almost always(*) displayed in a fixed-width font. No > font information is carried along with the program text at all; it is > assumed the reader will pick a font and size of their own preference, > with the only requirement being that it's monospaced. > > (*) There was a fad about 10 or 15 years ago to print code samples in > books in proportional fonts. Prentice-Hall seemed to be particularly > guilty of this. Fortunately, common sense prevailed and everybody has > gone back to monotype.
Hmm… One of my favourite books on programming is Intro to functional programming by Bird and Wadler (1st edition Prentice Hall). I always knew that part of why I liked the book was the beautifully typeset code. Now I know how this choice dates me!! [It was published in 1988; I used it to teach from '89 onwards] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
