Re: Color Forth
- To: misc
- Subject: Re: Color Forth
- From: wmor1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 19:50:05 +1000
- Organization: Monash University Student Network
- Priority: normal
> Date sent: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 22:31:35 -0400
> From: Andrew Sieber <asieber@usa.net>
> To: MISC mailing list <misc>
> Subject: Re: Color Forth
> wmor1@student.monash.edu.au wrote:
> > About colour Forth, nice idea but as Andrew Houghton pionts out, a bit
> > useless for colour blind people. Another topic is that while good
> > for clarifying syntax, how are we supposed to print it on a b&w
> > printer?
>
> Neither of those problems exist if you use Normal Forth as the
> underlying code. My C++ code shows up colorfully in Borland's editor,
> but it is still standard C++. I can also print the code on my b&w dot
> matrix printer, and it comes out as standard C++. Colorblind or not,
> the code is readable. The color on the screen is of course useless to a
> colorblind person, but it is not an obstacle.
> Since I was suggesting combining Borland's and Chuck's ideas and
> visually displaying color words _instead_ of b&w colons, semicolons,
> etc., but still having Normal Forth underneath, the b&w printers and
> colorblind people can simply ignore the color editor and use the
> underlying (b&w) Normal Forth instead. Yes, if colorblind people use
> the color editor, necessary information about the code will be invisible
> to them; however, nobody's under any obligation to use the color
> editor. It's all the same to the computer.
Agreed.
Just the sugesstion of replacing normal syntax with colour in other
messages.
Wayne.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wayne Morellini <wmor1@student.monash.edu.au>
Post Graduate Student Representative.
Rusden Campus, Deakin University, Vic, Australia.
GradDip Media Studies (Current), Bach InfoTech (Distinction)
& AD Business(Computing).
------------------------------------------------------------------------