21–30 of 207 posts
Mono looked squished to me - the intentional favoring of length over width made the whole editor look like I had an aspect ratio problem on my monitor. I appreciate trying to push the envelope and improve ergonomics, but I wish this would have been opt-in for upgraders.
Thanks, I hate it. My most recent update of IntelliJ turned this font on by default and I had to spend an hour trying to figure out what the font used to be. Mono looked squished to me - the intentional favoring of length over width made the whole editor look like I had an aspect ratio problem on my monitor. I appreciate trying to push the envelope and improve ergonomics, but I wish this would have been opt-in for up…
I was disappointed that despite presenting the cookie banner as if it were a terminal, the options did not accept keyboard input [Y]es, I agree [N]o, thanks Ok on topic: I'm never sure what to think of these "developer" fonts that make use of ligatures for combinations like ==, >=, ->, =>, etc. On one hand they do look really nice, but I always can't help but feel it would actually make things just a little bit harde…
It accepts keyboard input, but you have to click on the terminal first.
Thanks, I hate it. My most recent update of IntelliJ turned this font on by default and I had to spend an hour trying to figure out what the font used to be. Mono looked squished to me - the intentional favoring of length over width made the whole editor look like I had an aspect ratio problem on my monitor. I appreciate trying to push the envelope and improve ergonomics, but I wish this would have been opt-in for up…
Mine didn't? What update version did you update to that turned this on by default?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You really don’t have to use the ligatures, do you?
I don't know about other programs, but iTerm has a checkbox option to enable/disable ligatures.
While there is research suggesting a large x-height increases readability, I'm wondering whether this doesn't push the x-height just a little too far. CamelCase words no longer stand out visually very easily -- I'm not sure how I feel about that.
Thanks, I hate it. My most recent update of IntelliJ turned this font on by default and I had to spend an hour trying to figure out what the font used to be. Mono looked squished to me - the intentional favoring of length over width made the whole editor look like I had an aspect ratio problem on my monitor. I appreciate trying to push the envelope and improve ergonomics, but I wish this would have been opt-in for up…
You could have taken the opportunity to switch to Inconsolata.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It accepts keyboard input, but you have to click on the terminal first.
Then shame on them for not focusing it by default.
I was disappointed that despite presenting the cookie banner as if it were a terminal, the options did not accept keyboard input [Y]es, I agree [N]o, thanks Ok on topic: I'm never sure what to think of these "developer" fonts that make use of ligatures for combinations like ==, >=, ->, =>, etc. On one hand they do look really nice, but I always can't help but feel it would actually make things just a little bit harde…
Emacs has a minor mode (prettify-symbols-mode, I think) that makes substitutions like these. I tried it for a couple of months, but decided that it wasn't for me.
I'd much prefer if Emacs just supported actual ligatures.
Thanks, I hate it. My most recent update of IntelliJ turned this font on by default and I had to spend an hour trying to figure out what the font used to be. Mono looked squished to me - the intentional favoring of length over width made the whole editor look like I had an aspect ratio problem on my monitor. I appreciate trying to push the envelope and improve ergonomics, but I wish this would have been opt-in for up…