sienote: i think they look a bit like the classic plan9 fonts :)
Plan 9 fonts were also designed by B&H. Plan uses Lucida Sans Unicode and Lucida Typewriter as default fonts. Lucida Sans Unicode, with some minor alterations was renamed as Lucida Grande, the original system font on OS X, replaced only recently by Helvetica Neue. It’s funny that several people say this reminds them of Plan 9, but not OS X :-).
However, these fonts are more similar to the Luxi family of fonts (also from B&H) than the Lucida family.
Personally, I am going to continue programming (in acme, of course) using Lucida Grande (yes, I use a proportional font for programming).
What do you like in acme, compared to other editors (vim, Emacs, Atom, Visual Studio Code, Sublime Text…)?
[Comment removed by author]
Does it have any affordance for keybindings, or is it strictly mouse-driven other than text entry? I’ve always been interested in its plugin model, but haven’t had a sense of how I’d like it given my general dislike of using the mouse.
shameless self promotion
If you’re interested in the other Plan 9 editor, sam, there’s an updated version here: http://www.github.com/deadpixi/sam that has scalable font support and extensive support for keybindings.
Sadly none that I’m aware of. Sam is much, much simpler than Acmez though, so it’s probably (IMHO) easier to just dive right in to.
I would not say it’s significantly simpler, the command language is the same. It lacks interaction through a file system, so the lack of features could be interpreted as being simpler, I guess.
I use sam when I need to edit files on remote computers, but in my opinion the UI model makes it harder to use than acme.
No keybindings outside of basic unix keybindings (C-A, C-E, C-W), sorry.
Not to expressly shit on Acme, but that doesn’t sound like anything editors such as a Emacs or Vim can’t do. Well, it depends on how nicely you want to be able to move tiled windows around. I think transpose-frame does this on Emacs, but it’s not mouse-driven.
In Emacs, the only thing you can’t do in that list with the mouse is the first item. All the others are certainly possible, even I’ve bound Mouse4/5 to copy and paste.
Executable text, mutable text (including in win terminal windows), mouse chording, and mouse support in general, structural regexp, integrates well with arbitrary Unix tools, tiled window management, no distracting fluff; no options, no settings, no configuration files, no syntax highlighting, no colors.
Acme is by far the most important tool I use. If it were to disappear from the face of the earth, the first thing I would do is reimplement acme. Luckily, it would not take me very long as acme has very few features to implement, it relies on abstractions, not features.
A good demo: http://research.swtch.com/acme
One of the distinguishing features of Plan 9 software is the rejection of the idea that software alway needs constant development. It’s done, it works, it doesn’t need further development.
As someone who has done multiple Go ports to new hardware architectures and operating systems, I would be very unhappy if plan9port would be implemented in Go because I would not be able to use it until I would be finished.
To expand on that, I think macOS uses San Francisco UI nowadays. Helvetica Neue didn’t last long.
Indeed. AFAIK Helvetica Neue was only used by macOS 10.10 - it was replaced with (Apple-designed) San Francisco in 10.11.
It’s funny that several people say this reminds them of Plan 9, but not OS X :-).
well, i’ve never really used os x ;)
I loved the classic Plan 9 pelm font. The enormous and curvaceous curly brackets are still a wonder.
I like serif monospace fonts. (and I like single-story As!) The one I currently use is Luxi Serif Mono. An example.
I do see the Plan 9 inspiration, especially with the fact there’s a proportional version.
You got it backwards. Rob Pike is friends with Chuck Bigelow, so he got a deal where Plan 9 shipped with the Lucida Fonts. B&H then later developed the Luxi fonts, which bear some resemblance to Lucida, and then now B&H developed the Go font, which is a derivative of the Luxi fonts, and much closer to Luxi than Lucida.
So the Go fonts “look similar” to the Plan 9 fonts because they were designed by the same people guided by their same sense of artistic vision, not because “they were inspired by Plan 9”.
Coincidentally Lucida was used on OS X as the system font until recently, so I don’t understand why people see the similarity with Plan 9 but not with OS X!
Everyone should use Source Code Pro I think. Includes powerline symbols now, etc. And it’s just prettier.
And it’s just prettier.
Good that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Does it contain a gopher? :)
Monospace font for programming? Never! I use Lucida Grande for my text editor, a proportional font.
The 0Oo and 1iIl separation is excellent.
The box-drawing character set is incomplete and so anything but the light square-cornered style is hideous. There are tools which auto-generate these glyphs, so being complete is not hard. So why the limitation?
666 glyphs in each variant? Interesting choice.