101–110 of 224 posts
1) The braces are completely horrible
2) What kind of person thinks that making the fullstop massive and putting it in the middle of the line like a dot product sign is good?
3) Where even is the backtick?
4) For all their talk of legibility, lowercase l and 1 are very similar looking to my eyes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't use ligatures at all, but I have seen it on websites. So perhaps it's the CSS of the website that has decided to do this. I don't have any specific examples off hand, but my mental picture puts it on sites that also use this style of font: https://rubjo.github.io/victor-mono/ (although typing fi into the sandbox on the site doesn't exhibit the behavior).
Yup. It's the browser that's choosing to display this. As 'gdwatson pointed out, the font can indicate which ligatures are available, but whether or not the substation occurs also depends on the typesetting engine.
Very glad to see more “low x height” monospace fonts (x height is the height of lowercase letters relative to capital letters; I haven’t checked to be sure but my eyes tell me this is on the lower side). Source Code Pro has been my go-to for a very long time, and it has always bothered me that Apple opted for higher x-heights in their San Francisco re-design of Helvetica (which already has a high x height to begin wi…
Man I really have a vicerally negative reaction to this font. 1) The braces are completely horrible 2) What kind of person thinks that making the fullstop massive and putting it in the middle of the line like a dot product sign is good? 3) Where even is the backtick? 4) For all their talk of legibility, lowercase l and 1 are very similar looking to my eyes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The absolute worst is when a monospace font puts fi into a ligature with a width of 1 character, entirely defeating the purpose of being a monospaced font.
Can you provide an example of the font doing this? Substitution of individual characters with ligatures is in my experience a feature of the typesetting/display engine (which decides how to represent the "bytes" as glyphs), not the font itself. Indeed, this ligature substation is often something you can toggle in whatever application you're using if it's capable of doing the substitution at all.
One thing I really appreciate about fonts is the low-stakes nature of trying them out. Installing is easy, and doesn't take much space, you set your editor and try it out. There's no lock-in, switching back takes zero effort. So I'm always keen to give them a go, some stick, some don't. For what it's worth I'm in the no-ligature group. I want to see => not some ligature. But again that's subjective and there's room f…
To this day I haven't seen a monospaced font superior to Courier New. And before anyone asks: No, this isn't a meme. Yes, I'm 300% serious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yup. It's the browser that's choosing to display this. As 'gdwatson pointed out, the font can indicate which ligatures are available, but whether or not the substation occurs also depends on the typesetting engine.
So then it is the responsibility of the font to make sure that when a ligature that it made available is used that is displayed as two characters wide instead of one?
But maybe it's the intent of the designer to have each glyph have the same width, not each "character", so the glyph LESS-THAN OR EQUAL TO (≤, https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+2264) would be the same width as I suppose you could have the typesetting engine choose to somehow read the two characters, note that there's a ligature substitution, and "fit" the ligature glyph into a two-character space (say, padding the glyph or horizontally stretching it), but I doubt that would be very pleasing.
But ultimately what gets displayed is up to the typesetting engine: it can choose to use or not use ligatures; it can choose the spacing between glyphs; whether to "fake" certain styles (such as italics), text justification — all sorts of behavior. Good typesetting is available in many more applications today than it was, say, 25 years ago. There was all kinds of janky behavior going on, both from the engines not using information in the fonts when it was available, and faking it or overriding it as well.
I feel this typeface will run hotter than an Apple mono typeface but underperform in comparison to an AMD mono typeface
I don't love the aggressive curly braces. Does anyone else? I feel like the whole typeface here is consistently bland, and then there's the angry curly braces that pop out of nowhere.