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

Programming fonts

s9w.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 72 posts

Re: Programming fonts

#51

Post by VLM »

jryan49 wrote: post #20

Proves even further to me that Terminus is superior.

I agree with you, although I suspect many people confuse the clarity of Terminus with AA being forced off because its a bitmap font. They really want a non-AA display, and Terminus being bitmap forces the issue.

If you just shut off AA there are some fonts almost, but not quite, as good as Terminus. Non-AA Ubuntu Mono is almost as good as Terminus. Non-AA Source Code Pro is almost as nice as Terminus. Dejavu Sans Mono is almost as good as Terminus.

The clarity and consistency of Terminus never fails to impress me. Other fonts have like 25 good glyphs and at least one "whoops" usually a M or W or E. Think of Monoid or the sad M in otherwise good Ubuntu Mono. Then again Ubuntu mono is definable as a Terminus clone with a broken M. Or sometimes none of the glyphs are individual disasters but the whole font has crazy variations, think of the Meslos some verticals are double width very strange looking, unreadable, looks like old fashioned ransom note.

I used an OCR font for awhile a couple years ago. Its not bad once you get used to it. An ugly yet productive duckling. Easy to read does not necessarily equal beautiful (with the exception of Terminus).

I have a suspicion that Terminus and buckling spring / model-M keyboard use correlate, as a "will not accept anything but the absolute best" attitude.

Re: Programming fonts

#52

Post by man5quid »

jdlyga wrote: post #27

It's great that we have so many choices of great programming fonts nowadays. What's everyone's font of choice? I've been using Consolas for the last few years.

I tried using Inconsolata but recently switched to Anonymice pro.

Re: Programming fonts

#54

Post by jryan49 »

VLM wrote: post #51
jryan49 wrote: post #20

Proves even further to me that Terminus is superior.

I agree with you, although I suspect many people confuse the clarity of Terminus with AA being forced off because its a bitmap font. They really want a non-AA display, and Terminus being bitmap forces the issue. If you just shut off AA there are some fonts almost, but not quite, as good as Terminus. Non-AA Ubuntu Mono is almost as good as Terminus. Non-AA Source Code Pro is almost as nice as Terminus. Dejavu Sans Mon…

You're right. I have AA turned off on my machine, and use fonts that just look good without it.

Re: Programming fonts

#55

Post by marssaxman »

VLM wrote: post #51
jryan49 wrote: post #20

Proves even further to me that Terminus is superior.

I agree with you, although I suspect many people confuse the clarity of Terminus with AA being forced off because its a bitmap font. They really want a non-AA display, and Terminus being bitmap forces the issue. If you just shut off AA there are some fonts almost, but not quite, as good as Terminus. Non-AA Ubuntu Mono is almost as good as Terminus. Non-AA Source Code Pro is almost as nice as Terminus. Dejavu Sans Mon…

I've never understood why some people dislike antialiased text rendering so much. Aliased text is obviously inferior to my eyes - all the spurious 90-degree angles add meaningless noise to the character forms, as though the font is decorated with a lot of extra fuzz. Antialiasing smooths all this cruft away, leaving the character shape more clearly defined. And yet there are people who dislike this look enough to disable it and work around it, describing it as "blurry", though my experience is that it's less blurry. I really wonder what it is about their experience which differs so greatly from mine.

Re: Programming fonts

#56

Post by peterhajas »

jd3 wrote: post #32

Interesting project, but some of these look a bit... wrong to me. For example, ProFont is my favorite bitmap programming font and the renderer used makes it look bad. Just loaded it up in my Terminal.app to show how it /should/ look: [0]. Also while I'm at it, some cool fonts not mentioned that I think deserve some attention are tewi[1] and ProggyTiny[2]. Tewi glyphs are particularly nice [3]. [0]: http://i.imgur.com…

Woah, how'd you get your window controls to be like that?

Re: Programming fonts

#57

Post by weinzierl »

Excellent, I love it! Did you calculate the font size so that almost all lines are equally long automatically? Why are some lines shorter?

I think Courier and Courier New would be good additions. They are terrible programming fonts but for years were very widespread because they were very often the default and still very often are the last resort fallback.

Re: Programming fonts

#58

Post by to3m »

marssaxman wrote: post #55
VLM wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, although I suspect many people confuse the clarity of Terminus with AA being forced off because its a bitmap font. They really want a non-AA display, and Terminus being bitmap forces the issue. If you just shut off AA there are some fonts almost, but not quite, as good as Terminus. Non-AA Ubuntu Mono is almost as good as Terminus. Non-AA Source Code Pro is almost as nice as Terminus. Dejavu Sans Mon…

I've never understood why some people dislike antialiased text rendering so much. Aliased text is obviously inferior to my eyes - all the spurious 90-degree angles add meaningless noise to the character forms, as though the font is decorated with a lot of extra fuzz. Antialiasing smooths all this cruft away, leaving the character shape more clearly defined. And yet there are people who dislike this look enough to dis…

With AA text on a normal-DPI LCD screen, it never feels like I'm focussed on the screen properly. With no hard edges and no sharp corners, my eyes can't seem to find the right setting. Whatever I do, it just always feels slightly wrong. Blurry edges just don't make me think that something is smooth - they make me think I haven't focussed properly. Drives me nuts.

I wouldn't mind so much, but over time people seem to keep taking the option of a pixelly display away, and when anybody complains, they're told they don't know what they're seeing through their own eyes.

Fortunately, AA text + retina display, I like, because the pixels are too small for the blurriness to be visible, and things look sharp again. So roll on more of that please. (High-DPI, I mean. Not AA. We have more than enough AA to be getting on with.)

Re: Programming fonts

#59

Post by marssaxman »

to3m wrote: post #58
marssaxman wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood why some people dislike antialiased text rendering so much. Aliased text is obviously inferior to my eyes - all the spurious 90-degree angles add meaningless noise to the character forms, as though the font is decorated with a lot of extra fuzz. Antialiasing smooths all this cruft away, leaving the character shape more clearly defined. And yet there are people who dislike this look enough to dis…

With AA text on a normal-DPI LCD screen, it never feels like I'm focussed on the screen properly. With no hard edges and no sharp corners, my eyes can't seem to find the right setting. Whatever I do, it just always feels slightly wrong. Blurry edges just don't make me think that something is smooth - they make me think I haven't focussed properly. Drives me nuts. I wouldn't mind so much, but over time people seem to…

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

High-DPI displays are clearly the right long term solution. It was amazing to use one for the first time - I couldn't see the individual pixels anymore, and it was disconcerting in a really good way. It's like a bit of Hollywood fakery brought to life.

Re: Programming fonts

#60

Post by mariusc23 »

s9w wrote: post #16
sabarjp wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that non-retina images get doubled in size on a retina display, so it looks blurry. I suggest providing 2x sized images. You can use media queries to show different sized images or rely on down-sampling. There's a few different strategies.

oh wait, ALL images get 2x upscaled? That sounds crazy. There are double-sized samples in the compare mode. But if they're still upscaled by macOS, what can I do?

Use the srcset attribute to provide @2x sizes.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/Im...

Example:

Post reply on HN