TSE Pro v4.50 release candidate 5

[S.E. Mitchell]

https://semware.com/files/tse-pro-install/tse-setup-4.50rc5.zip

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jun 19 2023 v4.50 release candidate 5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carlo Hogeveen sent an updated cuamark:
If cumark is used for a new search with the "v"
option and a found line is selected from the
ViewFinds panel, then the text cursor now also goes
to the column of the found string.

HiLiteAttr changed to Color(Bright White on Cyan)
--
Sammy Mitchell

[Carlo Hogeveen]

Sammy,

Thanks!

My favorite 2.50 update is still the block syntax highlighting from rc4.
I find I enjoy it every time I encounter it.

There is still this typo in the read.me:
"SynHiInBlock" should be "SynHiInBlocks".
Because for now the read.me is the only documentation for new syntax, it matters.

Carlo

[H P]

According to the read.me;

Carlo Hogeveen sent an updated cuamark:

  If cumark is used for a new search with the "v"

  option and a found line is selected from the

  ViewFinds panel, then the text cursor now also goes

  to the column of the found string.

However according to the install.log file;

The file mac\cuamark.mac is the same as the file being installed, it will not be replaced

The file mac\cuamark.s is the same as the file being installed, it will not be replaced

Met vriendelijke groet,
With kind regards,

Muy atentamente,
Mit Freundliche Gruß,

Sinceramente,


H. Pikaar
Henri...@gmail.com

Op wo 21 jun 2023 om 13:03 schreef Carlo Hogeveen <t...@ecarlo.nl>:

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SemWare TSE Pro text editor" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to semware+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/000101d9a42f%24f861fdd0%24e925f970%24%40ecarlo.nl.

[Carlo Hogeveen]

HP:

> However according to the install.log file;
> The file mac\cuamark.mac is the same as the file being installed, it will not be replaced
> The file mac\cuamark.s is the same as the file being installed, it will not be replaced

For what it is worth:
1.
I think you mean the "<date>.install.log" file in TSE's latest "bak999" subdirectory.
2.
I cannot reproduce what you report.
If I first install 4.50 rc4 and then install 4.50 rc5 over it,
Then file "bak999\<date>.install.log" reports both cuamark files updated, and in the mac directory they are.

Maybe you already installed the new cuamark yourself from my website?
That would make sense, because I created cuamark's change in response to a feature you requested.

Carlo

[Henriques18]

Right now installed again and it's changed to the new one. So what went wrong I'll never know.

Op woensdag 21 juni 2023 om 17:16:58 UTC+2 schreef Carlo Hogeveen:

[Carlo Hogeveen]

Rc5 causes a new highlighting problem.

> HiLiteAttr changed to Color(Bright White on Cyan)

The real documentation of this rc5 change:
HiLiteAttr changed from Color(Red on White) to Color(Bright White on Cyan).
CursorInBlockAttr changed from Color(Intense Bright White on Blue) to Color(Intense Bright White on Green).

This TSE 4.50 rc5 change fixed the highlighting problem from TSE 4.50 rc4, that in an initial TSE installation the current line of a line block was unreadable. This was a side effect of the block syntax highlighting change in rc4.

However,
In an initial TSE installation default cuamark is loaded with its default options.
As soon as the following prompts have history, this causes a new highlighting problem:
The File Open prompt is unreadable.
If cuamark was configured for searching and it has history, then its search prompt is now unreadable too.

The unreadable prompts look like Color(Intense Bright White on Green), the undocumented change in rc5.

Carlo

[S.E. Mitchell]

Hmmm.   I have a fresh install, cuamark loaded, all options set to yes, and this is what I see at startup:

And while editing:

How do I reproduce the problem?

--

Sammy 

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SemWare TSE Pro text editor" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to semware+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/000b01d9a5c7%2433f2b7c0%249bd82740%24%40ecarlo.nl.

[Carlo Hogeveen]

 

Interesting.

This might be a case of no two people seeing colors exactly the same?

I cannot read the two prompts you have included in this mail.

Not without some staring and actively trying to decipher them.

To my eyesight you have reproduced the problem!

 

Perhaps some other people can weigh in with their perceptions?

How readable are the two prompts to you?

 

Carlo

 

 

 

From: sem...@googlegroups.com <sem...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of S.E. Mitchell
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2023 11:33 AM
To: sem...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [TSE] TSE Pro v4.50 release candidate 5

 

Hmmm.   I have a fresh install, cuamark loaded, all options set to yes, and this is what I see at startup:

 

 

 

And while editing:

 

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/CA%2BgEvkb2jpqM1o1wnr3M62yJNKfExd8%3Dvg2sCm23ZPNzoFKqAA%40mail.gmail.com.

[knud van eeden]

> This might be a case of no two people seeing colors exactly the same?

> I cannot read the two prompts you have included in this mail.

> Not without some staring and actively trying to decipher them.

> To my eyesight you have reproduced the problem!

 > Perhaps some other people can weigh in with their perceptions?

No problem at all reading that here also (at least with the colors of my screenshot above). Steps to reproduce: 1. Loaded <TSE>\mac\cuamark.mac macro, 2. then chose all the proposed default inputs with 'yes' or 'no', 3. then chose in the TSE menu 'File' > 'Open' 4. and then saw that result as in the screenshot.

Current conclusion: So based on this observation, the issue should be assumed likely be individual person related (=some see it, others not), e.g. to the color (light) green and white combination which are (assumed at this moment) not distinguished by some.

with friendly greetings

Knud van Eeden

===

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/000201d9a681%2402546e60%2406fd4b20%24%40ecarlo.nl.

[knud van eeden]

So anybody doing the test should read without any problems the filename

 unnamed-1

in my screenshot below in this email.

If you can, you should not be having the issue.

If you can not, you should be having this issue. Assumed this is a (very) rare event thus and a color detection / color difference issue.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/179159053.4635000.1687640414197%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Guy Rouillier]

I concur with Carlo, white on bright green is hard to read.  I'm old, so perhaps younger people won't have such issues.

--

Guy Rouillier

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/000201d9a681%2402546e60%2406fd4b20%24%40ecarlo.nl.

[S.E. Mitchell]

Any suggestions for a suitable color for the CursorInBlock attribute?
How does Bright White on Yellow look?
Intense Bright White on Black?
Intense Bright White on Cyan?

It is interesting - cuamark appears to always use white as the
foreground color, and then whatever CursorInBlock is set to as the
background color. This is in prompts only, and when they first come
up. But I can't find where in cuamark that it does this. It must
some interaction with the editor that I don't understand.

Maybe we should just change cuamark, in the before_/after_ prompt
hooks, to set a good neutral color?

Any suggestions appreciated!
--
Sammy Mitchell

On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 2:30 AM Guy Rouillier <guy.ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I concur with Carlo, white on bright green is hard to read. I'm old, so perhaps younger people won't have such issues.
>
> --
> Guy Rouillier
>
>
> On 6/24/2023 5:48:20 AM, "Carlo Hogeveen" <t...@ecarlo.nl> wrote:
>
>
>
> Interesting.
>
> This might be a case of no two people seeing colors exactly the same?
>
> I cannot read the two prompts you have included in this mail.
>
> Not without some staring and actively trying to decipher them.
>
> To my eyesight you have reproduced the problem!
>
>
>
> Perhaps some other people can weigh in with their perceptions?
>
> How readable are the two prompts to you?
>
>
>
> Carlo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: sem...@googlegroups.com <sem...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of S.E. Mitchell
> Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2023 11:33 AM
> To: sem...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [TSE] TSE Pro v4.50 release candidate 5
>
>
>
> Hmmm. I have a fresh install, cuamark loaded, all options set to yes, and this is what I see at startup:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> And while editing:

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/em14dbd3c9-027a-4f27-993e-014aab5f82da%40f232c5dd.com.

[knud van eeden]

If I 

1. run g32.exe in 4.50 rc4 (thus previous version)

2. then 'New file'

3. then execute macro 'cuamark'

4. Then press <ENTER> on all 'Yes' or 'No' proposals

5. Then menu 'TSE' > 'File' > 'Open'

6. Then it shows a black background (see screenshot 1)

7. If typing then white letters (see screenshot 2)

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/CA%2BgEvkZ2tnFUt5r5juSoeYmfDG85qrS5R%2BusCtwLhiN9S%3DQLQw%40mail.gmail.com.

[knud van eeden]

The only difference between cuamark rc4 and cuamark rc5 seems to be here:

[S.E. Mitchell]

I don't think the color issue has anything to do with the recent change to cuamark, e.g., it has to do with the CursorInBlock color.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/273115124.3793344.1687780535645%40mail.yahoo.com.

[knud van eeden]

Yes, I tested with this little program, and it shows only non-relevant information regarding color:

PROC Main()

 STRING options[255] = Lower( GetHistoryStr( _FINDOPTIONS_HISTORY_, 1 ) )

 Warn( options )

 Warn( GetHistoryStr( _FIND_HISTORY_, 1 ), " ", options )

END

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/CA%2BgEvkYp6ii9dEZmBdoGZvggD0Ky1x8DuKqrDhNJh0gKMo4KLg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Carlo Hogeveen]

Sammy,

No, do not change cuamark for this.
It does what it is supposed to do, and hardcoded changing a cuamark color might ruin a non-default color scheme that was created without that change.
Cuamark initially marks its prompt line as a block. Because the prompt line is the only line it is also the current line, so cuamark correctly uses the CursorLineInBlock color.

In an initial TSE installation the new highlighting problem does not occur in the current line of a block in the editing window, because then the SynHiInBlocks option changes the current block line's background color to what syntax highlight proscribes, making the current line in the block readable there.

So the solution should be to just set an initial TSE installation's CursorInBlockAttr to color that is readable to all people.
How to determine such colors in general I do not know yet.


My perception of your three proposed colors for CursorInBlockAttr:

Bright White on Yellow look?

Readable in a cuamark prompt, not with the comment highlighting foreground color in an editing block.

Intense Bright White on Black?

Readable in a cuamark prompt, not with most highlighting foreground colors in an editing block.

Intense Bright White on Cyan?

Not readable in a cuamark prompt, always readable in an editing block.

I am going to search if there is such a thing as a color solution that fits all kinds of eyesights.

Carlo

[knud van eeden]

1. I did a search for all occurrences of BRIGHT followed by WHITE:

grep -i0sx "BRIGHT.*WHITE" *.*

2. I did this in TSE 4.5 rc4 versus 4.5 rc5.

3. Only these files where a hit

g:\wordproc\tse\tse_beta45000rc4 Mon 26-06-23 14:07:02>grep -i0sx "BRIGHT.*WHITE" *.*

_run: run: program: filegreptse

SemWare Grep v2.03 for Win32 [Mar  3 2016]

Copyright 1996-2016 SemWare Corp. All rights reserved worldwide.

File: G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\cd.s

File: G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\editfile.s

File: G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\hiliteall.mac

File: G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\hiliteall.s

File: G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\invaders.s

File: G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\projects.s

File: G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\tsecomp.s

File: G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\xmas.s

File: G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\read.me

File: G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\sc32.exe

File: G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\ui\tse.cfg

4. Then I create a ddd.bat file running beyondcompare between those files in rc4 vs rc5:

bey G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\cd.s           G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc5\mac\cd.s

pause

bey G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\editfile.s     G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc5\mac\editfile.s

pause

bey G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\hiliteall.mac  G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc5\mac\hiliteall.mac

pause

bey G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\hiliteall.s    G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc5\mac\hiliteall.s

pause

bey G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\invaders.s     G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc5\mac\invaders.s

pause

bey G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\projects.s     G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc5\mac\projects.s

pause

bey G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\tsecomp.s      G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc5\mac\tsecomp.s

pause

bey G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\mac\xmas.s         G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc5\mac\xmas.s

pause

bey G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\read.me            G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc5\read.me

pause

bey G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\sc32.exe           G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc5\sc32.exe

pause

bey G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc4\ui\tse.cfg         G:\WORDPROC\TSE\tse_beta45000rc5\ui\tse.cfg

5. The only relevant result was tse.cfg, see e.g. CursorInBlockAttr in the screenshot.

6. Thus assumed it should be in tse.cfg 

[Carlo Hogeveen]

A tiny correction:
I missed that Sammy wrote that cuamark's initial prompt's foreground color is always white, overruling CursorInBlock's foreground color.
I can improve on that with the bit of info, that actually cuamark's initial prompt's foreground color is MsgAttr's foreground color.
It is not something that cuamark explicitly does; I assume it is a side-effect in TSE prompts.
That said, this new bit is not a solution to the problem.

Carlo

[Carlo Hogeveen]

Here are my conclusions.

Given a new TSE installation's existing default colors.

Given the TSE 4.50 rc4 and rc5 SynHiInBlocks configuration option that is default ON, which in a marked block makes TSE use syntax highlighting foreground colors on BlockAttr and CursorInBlockAttr background colors.
This change causes the two block background colors to have a huge chance of overlapping with a syntax highlighting foreground color or being so close to it as to make it unreadable.

Given that a cuamark-enhanced initial prompt uses an MsgAttr foreground on a CursorInBlockAttr background color.

Given that the readability of colored text on a colored background depends on each individual's eyesight.

1.
Given the context there is no color change for just CursorInBlock that will not either make a cuamark-enhanced prompt unreadable or make a syntax highlighting color in (the current line of) a marked block unreadable.

2.
I did find a two-property-change that for me (!) made everything readable again:
CursorInBlockAttr = Black on White
BlockAttr = Intense Black On Yellow, or Intense Black On Cyan, or Intense Black On Green.

3.
I checked the existing color schemes that are included with TSE, but found none to recommend as a one-step solution.

Carlo

[zhong zhao]

To make all forecolors and backcolors is readable, you can use Zhong Zhao's palette:

https://groups.google.com/g/semware/c/HrdYRxCL5O4
(^_^)

[knud van eeden]

One could try this test

https://eu.enchroma.com/pages/color-blindness-test?format2=number#test

for example my outcome is 

(be sure to select the digits very carefully and not clicking mistakenly on other numbers, otherwise just redo the test):

https://eu.enchroma.com/pages/normal-color-vision-test-result

[Eckhard Hillmann]

I have a really hard time to figure out what is written in the promts. With my eyesight this is a problem. The combination of colors is allmost unreadable to me.

 

Eckhard

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/000201d9a681%2402546e60%2406fd4b20%24%40ecarlo.nl.

 

[Joe Berry]

It is difficult for me to read.  If changing the colors was not an option I would change to another product.

Joe Berry

[knud van eeden]

Hello,

FYIO:

===

"Which color combinations are the best to read with the human eye?"

===

[ChatGPT-4 Plus]

The human eye responds best to high-contrast color combinations when it

comes to reading. The most legible text and background color

combinations often involve one very dark color and one very light

color. Here are a few specific examples:

1. **Black and White**: This is the most classic and arguably the most

readable combination. Black text on a white background is ubiquitous

because of its high contrast and clarity.

2. **White and Black**: This is the opposite of the first combination,

often used in "dark mode" themes to reduce glare and eye strain.

3. **Blue and White**: This is another high contrast combination that's

easy to read. Blue is a calm color that doesn't strain the eyes.

4. **Yellow and Black**: This combination is one of the highest

contrast pairs and often used for warning signs or emergency notices.

5. **Green and White or Black**: Dark green text on a white background,

or light green on a black background, is also easy on the eyes.

6. **Red and White**: Red should generally be used sparingly as it can

be harsh on the eyes in large amounts, but red on a white background

can be a good way to highlight or emphasize important text.

Remember that the specific shades of the colors matter as well; dark

shades on a dark background or light shades on a light background will

be hard to read. Also consider the medium (digital or print), the size

of the text, and the length of the reading experience. For example,

while yellow text on a black background is highly visible, it might not

be ideal for long articles or reports because it can be overly

stimulating for the eyes over time.

===

[ChatGPT-3.5 Plus]

When it comes to readability, there are a few color combinations that

are generally considered to be the best for the human eye. These

combinations ensure sufficient contrast and minimize eye strain. Here

are some recommendations:

1. Black text on a white background: This classic combination provides

a high contrast and is widely used in books, newspapers, and websites.

2. Dark gray text on a light gray background: This combination offers a

softer contrast than black and white but still maintains readability.

It is often used in applications and websites that aim for a more muted

color scheme.

3. Dark blue text on a white background: Blue is also a good choice for

text as it is easy on the eyes. Dark blue on a white background

provides a pleasing contrast and is commonly used in applications.

4. Black text on a light yellow background: This combination is

particularly useful for reducing eye strain, especially for people with

dyslexia. The yellow tint on the background can help improve

readability.

5. White text on a dark background: While light text on a dark

background is generally considered less readable than dark text on a

light background, it can be suitable for certain contexts, such as

presentations or low-light environments. White text on a dark gray or

black background is commonly used in movie subtitles or coding

environments.

Remember that individual preferences and visual impairments can affect

readability. It's always a good idea to consider the specific context

and the target audience when choosing color combinations for optimal

readability.

with friendly greetings

Knud van Eeden

[Carlo Hogeveen]

I like the following rephrasing of the problem, and hope it helps someone. And I have tips.

Before TSE 4.50 rc4 the syntax highlighting letter colors only needed to be readable against 1 background color.

Since TSE 4.50 rc4 with the "Syntax Hilite inside Blocks" option On, the syntax highlighting letter colors need to be readable against up to 3 background colors:
- In normal text against their syntax highlighting background color.
- In the current line of block marked text against the "Cursor Line in Block" background color.
- In other block marked text against the "Blocked" background color.

Making syntax highlighted letters readable against three background colors is extremely hard.
Given that default TSE is limited to 16 colors, it is highly likely that one of the 3 background colors will make one of the many syntax highlighting colors unreadable.

Tip 1.
One way to reduce the problem is to make the background color for "Block" and "Cursor Line in Block" the same.
Now you have only 2 background colors to placate.
In TSE's GUI version you can optionally install my CursorLine extension to give the cursor line a different shade.
This also works in marked blocks.
https://ecarlo.nl/tse/ToolsAndExtensions.html#CursorLine

Tip 2.
Make all your background colors dark and all your foreground (letter) colors bright, or do the opposite.
This is a quicker route to legibility.

I have not mentioned the cuamark-enhanced prompts yet.
They initially use the foreground (letter) color of "Messages" against the background color of "Cursor Line in Block".
I have no tip for that.

Carlo

[knud van eeden]

> Given that default TSE is limited to 16 colors,

PS and what about this '16' (sixteen)? colors you mentioned in an earlier email recently, that was actually what started my investigation.

I only get 8 colors thus:

1. Black

2. Blue

3. Cyan

4. Green

5. Magenta

6. Red

7. White

8. Yellow

9. ???

10. ???

11. ???

12. ???

13. ???

14. ???

15. ???

16. ???

Please clarify if possible.

Thanks

with friendly greetings

Knud van Eeden

Carlo

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SemWare TSE Pro text editor" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to semware+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/semware/002d01d9a8e4%24d53f5e10%247fbe1a30%24%40ecarlo.nl.

[Carlo Hogeveen]

> > Given that default TSE is limited to 16 colors,

> PS and what about this '16' (sixteen)? colors you mentioned in an earlier
> email recently, that was actually what started my investigation.

Yeah, the Color() function's documentation is incomplete.

Default Color()'s parameter can refer to 16 foreground colors "on" 16 background colors.
The "foreground color" is the color of characters and the "background color" is the background color of those characters.
Default the 16 possible foreground colors are the same as the 16 possible background colors.

The names of the 16 foreground colors are:
Black, Blue, Green, Cyan, Red, Magenta, Yellow, White, Bright Black, Bright Blue, Bright Green, Bright Cyan, Bright Red, Bright Magenta, Bright Yellow, Bright White.

The names of the 16 background colors are:
Black, Blue, Green, Cyan, Red, Magenta, Yellow, White, Intense Black, Intense Blue, Intense Green, Intense Cyan, Intense Red, Intense Magenta, Intense Yellow, Intense White.

The "bright" vs "intense" is Color()'s weird way to let us tell it to modify the named foreground or background color respectively, or both.
Default a "bright" foreground color is the same as its corresponding "intensive" background color.

Carlo

[zhong zhao]

A bright gray background is more eye friendly than a white or black background and can support more readable foreground colors.