Some people (or even a lot of people, I don't know) think it helps them read code if different syntactic elements have different visual appearances.
You seem to argue that they "shouldn't" feel that, since it hasn't been "proved".
Sure, you can do a study and somehow try to measure if some dimension of understanding is more easily acquired with or without syntax highlighting, but what would be the point? To then force those who like it, to not use it anymore? Why?
In other words, if you like Cubist art, or hamburgers, or tofu, do you require all of those to be somehow "proven" before you're allowed to like them?
Some people (or even a lot of people, I don't know) think it helps them read code if different syntactic elements have different visual appearances.
You seem to argue that they "shouldn't" feel that, since it hasn't been "proved".
Sure, you can do a study and somehow try to measure if some dimension of understanding is more easily acquired with or without syntax highlighting, but what would be the point? To then force those who like it, to not use it anymore? Why?
In other words, if you like Cubist art, or hamburgers, or tofu, do you require all of those to be somehow "proven" before you're allowed to like them?