On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Ben Coman <b...@openinworld.com> wrote:
> For assignment, I would say bold both := and the variable being assigned > to. > I like that a lot, especially since it draws the two critical elements of variable and assignment together. On a minor note, both := and = are currently the same color: black. That only furthers the ":= is a message" misconception. It might be worthwhile also giving := its own color, given its uniqueness. > Underlining sounds interesting, but there are a few choices: > a. nested underlining - self someMessage: (self otherMessage: arg 1 and: > arg2) and: arg3 > b. non-nested underlining - only underline #otherMessage:and: and not > #someMessage:and: > c. dynamically underline only message where cursor is located. > I think you could do nested underlining in the same way that nested blocks and parentheses work. someMessage: and the second and: are underlined in black. otherMessage: and the first and: are underlined in green. That way nesting is clear. This would also be useful for code with nested conditionals, probably the most common occurrence of nested multi-part messages. I also like (c) as a minimally intrusive change that could help novices when they write code. It has the disadvantage that novices couldn't look at a piece of foreign code and get where the multi-part messages were. Cheers, Jeff -- Jochen "Jeff" Rick, Ph.D. http://www.je77.com/ Skype ID: jochenrick
