Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dev Fonts

devfonts.gafi.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 342 posts

Re: Dev Fonts

#11

Post by fyhn »

uallo wrote: post #5

More and more often, I see ligatures being used on such fonts. E.g. === or != are combined in a visually single character. Personally, I don't like that at all as I think it makes code less readable. It is probably something that you can get used to. But what exactly is the appeal of it anyway?

For instance != is just a way to write something that looks similar to ≠. With ligatures, you can actually see the symbol you're representing, and not an approximation. I suppose that is the appeal. And it looks neat.

Re: Dev Fonts

#12

Post by sondr3 »

uallo wrote: post #5

More and more often, I see ligatures being used on such fonts. E.g. === or != are combined in a visually single character. Personally, I don't like that at all as I think it makes code less readable. It is probably something that you can get used to. But what exactly is the appeal of it anyway?

It looks pretty, that was at least the reason I started using it. And now I’m so used to them that I can’t live without them, and I don’t get the “less readable” argument. Most of the fonts make the ligature the same width as the underlying characters, just making them look prettier. My font of choice, PragmataPro [0], has both variants with and without ligatures if you so desire.

[0]: https://fsd.it/shop/fonts/pragmatapro/

Re: Dev Fonts

#13

Post by nicoburns »

fyhn wrote: post #11
uallo wrote: post #5

More and more often, I see ligatures being used on such fonts. E.g. === or != are combined in a visually single character. Personally, I don't like that at all as I think it makes code less readable. It is probably something that you can get used to. But what exactly is the appeal of it anyway?

For instance != is just a way to write something that looks similar to ≠. With ligatures, you can actually see the symbol you're representing, and not an approximation. I suppose that is the appeal. And it looks neat.

> With ligatures, you can actually see the symbol you're representing, and not an approximation.

I think the flip side (which is why many people don't like them) is that with ligatures you can't see the actual code that you've written, only an approximation.

Re: Dev Fonts

#14

Post by kowlo »

Narann wrote: post #4

Very nice! I tend to use tiny sized font and I don't see any option to change font size. I'm always surprised by the huge default font size in text editors and IDEs. So I ask: Is there such a "standard" dev font size every dev uses and no one complains?

Interesting question... it might be difficult to pin this down with font-size though, because of different monitors, resolutions, scaling, etc.

Even when physical panel size/resolution/scaling/panel type is the same, a different model can present different text clarity... e.g. https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/dell/ultrasharp-u2720...

And we haven't even mentioned eyesight yet!

Re: Dev Fonts

#15

Post by ldjb »

uallo wrote: post #5

More and more often, I see ligatures being used on such fonts. E.g. === or != are combined in a visually single character. Personally, I don't like that at all as I think it makes code less readable. It is probably something that you can get used to. But what exactly is the appeal of it anyway?

I suppose some might say the code looks cleaner with ligatures and they better convey the meaning of the code (e.g. ≠ is easier to understand than !=).

Personally, however, I like to see exactly what it is I am typing, exactly which symbols are being used. Ligatures distort that.

Ligatures are fine when reading prose, but I find them too confusing when coding. That's a personal preference, though. I'm sure some people have no problem with them.

I expect a significant proportion of programmers do not like coding using fonts with ligatures, so it's interesting that this website only provides the ability to filter fonts to display only those with ligatures. I would have liked the option to only display fonts WITHOUT ligatures.

Re: Dev Fonts

#16

Post by chrismorgan »

My favourite monospaced font is Triplicate https://practicaltypography.com/triplicate.html>: the only true serif monospace that I know of (though I have a vague feeling I found one other at some point). Every other serif monospace I know of is a slab serif. Triplicate’s variable stroke thickness is also exceedingly rare in monospaced fonts; almost everyone goes for uniform stroke thickness, as is customary with sans-serif fonts but anathema for true serif fonts (though slab serifs could be either). Variable stroke thickness can be a bit iffy on low-resolution displays, but so long as you keep the size up or use a high-resolution display, I find it very pleasant. I’ve been using Triplicate everywhere for the last few years, including on my website.

(Also note on that page, since people are talking about ligatures a lot in this thread: “No, there are no programming ligatures in Triplicate, and there never will be.” with a link to https://practicaltypography.com/ligatures-in-programming-fon..., which can be distilled to the quote “ligatures in programming fonts are a terrible idea”. I agree.)

Pragmata Pro and Operator are two other well-regarded and popular commercial monospaced fonts that are missing from this list.

Re: Dev Fonts

#17

Post by rpastuszak »

sondr3 wrote: post #12
uallo wrote: post #5

More and more often, I see ligatures being used on such fonts. E.g. === or != are combined in a visually single character. Personally, I don't like that at all as I think it makes code less readable. It is probably something that you can get used to. But what exactly is the appeal of it anyway?

It looks pretty, that was at least the reason I started using it. And now I’m so used to them that I can’t live without them, and I don’t get the “less readable” argument. Most of the fonts make the ligature the same width as the underlying characters, just making them look prettier. My font of choice, PragmataPro [0], has both variants with and without ligatures if you so desire. [0]: https://fsd.it/shop/fonts/pragm…

How much did you pay for it? I love typography but this looks quite pricey

Re: Dev Fonts

#18

Post by chrismorgan »

fyhn wrote: post #11
uallo wrote: post #5

More and more often, I see ligatures being used on such fonts. E.g. === or != are combined in a visually single character. Personally, I don't like that at all as I think it makes code less readable. It is probably something that you can get used to. But what exactly is the appeal of it anyway?

For instance != is just a way to write something that looks similar to ≠. With ligatures, you can actually see the symbol you're representing, and not an approximation. I suppose that is the appeal. And it looks neat.

Trouble is, that argument falls apart because != is only akin to ≠ if == is actually =. If you use a language with := for assignment and = for comparison (or something similar), sure, making != appear as ≠ might make sense. But if you’re using almost any C-family language, you’ve already broken the mathematical model of what the equals sign means. After that, I side with nicoburns and say that now you’re obscuring what it actually means (in favour of something that’s more or less incorrect in mathematical notation).

Re: Dev Fonts

#20

Post by unclekev »

binarysneaker wrote: post #9

I've tried most of these at some point over the past few years and eventually settled on JetBrains Mono. I love it. The story about how it was created is pretty interesting... https://www.jetbrains.com/lp/mono/ And yes, there's a powerline version. (Not affiliated with JetBrains in any way)

I've never seen a font's design explained so well.

There's so many subliminal things that I had never thought about/considered.

Post reply on HN