51–60 of 342 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This looks really nice, too bad it doesn't (and never will) support ligatures. I understand the point the author is trying to make about ligatures in the separate blog post, but boy do I love my ligatures when programming.
Can you easily differenciate between == and === with ligatures ? That's one thing that holds me back to trying ligatures.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey Narann, I assume you are in your early 20s. During the early part of my career, I used to love to design and develop with very tiny fonts. In-fact, there were a time when there was a craze for Bitmap pixel fonts which looks the best at 8px. I used to build apps for Physicians who uses a hand-held device called Pocket PC[1]. My weapon of choice when it comes to fonts were these 8px bitmap fonts for the interfaces.…
I am 47, and still prefer smaller fonts. Not because my vision is perfect! But it seems to have accommodated to looking at small fonts for last 25+ years. I wonder how rare / frequent it may be.
My favorite recent font discovery is Simplex Roman. Designed in 1967 for early CRT vector displays by Dr. A. V. Hershey (for the US Naval Weapons Laboratory!), and released into the public domain. Incredibly pleasant looking even today: http://paulbourke.net/dataformats/hershey/ OpenType conversions: https://github.com/scruss/AVHershey-OTF/tree/master/otf Reminds me of vector arcade games like Asteroids and Tempest..…
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…
The "l" looks like a big "1" in Triplicate. There is no way I will use a font like that for programming.
(However, if you try to enable both the Code and Poly features—Poly meaning “don’t be a true monospace, make characters like l and i a little narrower and characters like m a little wider”—you end up with a slightly narrower flat-bottomed l glyph, rather than a curved tail. See this, for example, in https://chrismorgan.info/blog/make-and-git-diff-test-harness..., which is set in Code + Poly. Disable the `code { font-feature-settings: "ss01" 1, "ss02" }` CSS rule to see the effect of removing Poly—you get the curved tail l glyph back again. I’ve been meaning to sort out a better glyph for the combination, but I haven’t gotten round to it yet, because it’s annoyingly difficult to actually do that sort of thing.)
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…
There’s nothing better and more readable than SF Mono, which isn’t there(license), but anyone can download and use it. :)
> You may use the Apple Font solely in conjunction with Apple-branded applications, including, but not limited to, Xcode, Terminal.app and Console.app.
So no, you really can't. Unless you just don't care since it's so good, which is not something that I would condone, obviously, since that would be morally wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I do agree with the Butterick that when presenting code to others, for example as examples, the ligatures are a big no, because in this case you actually need to see what characters you need to input.
It's missing DejaVu Sans (Code) :(