I have little objection to some people preferring fewer colors or having fewer things called out for coloring. What I don't understand is the leap from "This particular scheme is totally overdoing it" to "Let's discard the notion entirely" Merely adjusting the colors that you use and the things that you highlight seems like a clear winning solution.
Re:Syntax Off (2012)
by mixmastamyk on Sunday November 17, 2013 @05:32PM
(#6751336)
> there's no point highlighting language keywords;
Disagree, it helps confirm you typed it correctly when you are trying to, and that you've named something incompatibly when you aren't. Thereby very likely preventing syntax/name errors before they happen.
> there's no point highlighting language keywords; we're just doing it because it's easy to do so. Rather conserve the color and our attention for when it's truly needed.
Yes, highlighting language keywords is like capitalizing or bolding the unstressed words in English:
THERE IS A book ABOUT programming ON THE table.
But the need for color seems too strong to fight with pure rationality. Perhaps it's enough that adding a little color to an environment we spend a significant amount of our lives in makes us happy. Since I have no taste, garishness doesn't bother me :)
Here's an example of color being used in a relatively staid place -- and paying for itself: https://plus.google.com/110440139189906861022/posts/UqyUZdqP...
Hopefully these considerations will be subsumed by new research by Bret Victor or Rune Madsen (http://vimeo.com/61113159).
For now, here's my preferred syntax highlighting, with just a dash of color in most usual places, but two colors for comments: http://i.imgur.com/H1h7M.png. (Why 2 comment colors? http://akkartik.name/post/2012-11-24-18-10-36-soc has the scoop.) Notice how the left pane is C++ and the right pane is my toy lisp, and the syntax kinda harmonizes.