[HN Gopher] MonoLisa - A font designed for developers
___________________________________________________________________
MonoLisa - A font designed for developers
Author : qubitcoder
Score : 200 points
Date : 2022-02-14 19:15 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.monolisa.dev)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.monolisa.dev)
| pianoben wrote:
| The first font with a pre-existing theme song:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMH96B8QWcc
| mortenjorck wrote:
| What I like most about this font is that it has a completely
| different aesthetic from my favorite monospace, JetBrains mono.
| It has more of the humanist flavor of a Frutiger versus the DIN-
| like rationalism most monospace fonts adopt.
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| this is too expensive, I would pay $40
| mikojan wrote:
| Not a fan of these sharp modern faces in general. However, the
| small text in this one looks particularly "smudgy".
|
| I stopped hopping monospace fonts when I discovered Go Mono. Go
| Mono does not seem to get blurry even at small sizes. M, m, n
| always look impeccable. Not so here.
|
| I'm not sure. Maybe something is wrong with the text-rendering in
| my browser.
| cercatrova wrote:
| Do people really care that much about editor fonts? I just use SF
| Mono and call it a day. I've never had a problem where the font,
| of all things, was the main cause of something not working for
| me.
| imglorp wrote:
| No, sorry fontographers, but I can't tell the difference
| between the scores of mono fonts created in the last half dozen
| years. As long as it's kinda pleasing and can easily see the
| differences between () and {}, 1iIlL| and oO0, I'm all set.
| cortesoft wrote:
| It's definitely something some people care about, although I am
| certainly in the camp of not caring at all. I have no idea what
| font my IDE uses, and I have never thought about changing it.
| the_mitsuhiko wrote:
| If you're looking your day at nothing else but text it's the
| most obvious thing to spend time and money on to improve. Sure,
| it's an utilitarian thing at the end of the day, but why should
| it not look pleasant to your eyes?
|
| I don't think I ever had _a problem_ with a font, but that does
| not mean I do not want to spend a bit of time and effort to
| improve my experience. I could probably also get away with a
| much worse keyboard or monitor and be just as productive. But
| would I enjoy it just as much? Probably not.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Idk, putting the $199 towards buying a nicer monitor seems
| like the pro gamer move. There are billions of free fonts out
| there.
| the_mitsuhiko wrote:
| I'm not sure what you're referring to. The font is a one
| time purchase and significantly cheaper than a new monitor.
| Both things (a better monitor and a better font) can make
| you enjoy the things you're doing more.
|
| Yes, there might be billions of free fonts out there, but
| the cost of that font is also not exactly making a huge
| impact for me that I have to save money there. Why would I
| start saving with the font all the sudden when I spend more
| money on literally everything else? Does not really compute
| to me.
| toiletfuneral wrote:
| pc86 wrote:
| The point is to make little things a little nicer, that's all.
| [deleted]
| josefrichter wrote:
| I am one of those using this font for ~1 year now, very happy
| with it. As a designer/developer with penchant for typography I
| am the perfect target customer I guess.
| maupin wrote:
| Looks good, but I'm still in love with Consolas.
| bjornsteffanson wrote:
| Same. You might find Inconsolata interesting, too:
| https://github.com/googlefonts/Inconsolata
| zppln wrote:
| I thought this was gonna be yet another monospace font I wouldn't
| be able to tell from all the others, but fuck me as soon as the
| page loaded this one just spoke to me. Grabbing this for sure,
| well done!
| jay_kyburz wrote:
| There is a font on my KDE desktop called just "Monospace" and its
| a great font.
|
| I can't find a font file called Monospace. Does anybody know what
| the font is? I would love to have it on my windows machine.
| anuragsoni wrote:
| Different distributions pick different defaults for
| `Monospace`. If you are using KDE on ubuntu, `Monospace` might
| be pointing to `Ubuntu Mono`. On other linux distros if they
| are sticking to KDE defaults, then Monospace will point to Hack
| [1]
|
| [1] https://sourcefoundry.org/hack/
| michaelmrose wrote:
| I'm guessing this is just whatever the default monospace font
| is rather than being a font called Monospace.
| gatonegro wrote:
| I'm pretty sure the default "monospace" font in KDE is mapped
| to Hack: https://sourcefoundry.org/hack/
| kbd wrote:
| Unfortunately not available to compare on
| https://www.programmingfonts.org/
|
| While I'm here: Victor Mono has been my programming font of
| choice for a while now: https://rubjo.github.io/victor-mono/
|
| Oh, look at that, the Victor Mono homepage has a font comparison
| slider that allows you to compare it to MonoLisa! MonoLisa
| advertises that it's wider than other monospace fonts, and you
| can really see that in the comparison. One of the things I
| appreciate about Victor Mono is that it is _narrower_ than many
| other monospace fonts (while still being very readable), allowing
| you to fit more code side-by-side.
| Ezku wrote:
| Oh, this was a new one for me.
|
| In case you like narrow but Victor's not your thing, I can
| enthusiastically point you towards Iosevka. (That's also
| available in Victor's comparison picker. Nice!)
| daliusd wrote:
| I love both Iosevka and Victor Mono, but ended using Victor
| Mono because it has script version for italics.
| byteski wrote:
| Does Victor Mono have nerd font support? Bc Iosevka does
| kbd wrote:
| $ brew tap-info "homebrew/cask-fonts" --json | jq -r
| '.[].cask_tokens[]' | rg victor homebrew/cask-
| fonts/font-victor-mono-nerd-font homebrew/cask-
| fonts/font-victor-mono
| rbanffy wrote:
| I don't know why anyone would even bother to even go beyond the
| first item on the list. Such beauty, such elegant geometry,
| such timeless classic lines. Truly an elegant font for a more
| civilized time.
|
| https://www.programmingfonts.org/#font3270
|
| BTW, I'm also a huge fan of Luxi Mono, but I edit it and add a
| dot in the middle of the zero to make it different from the O.
| I like it because it reminds me a bit of the Sun console font
| (which I always forget the name). I could also go with Go Mono,
| which is mostly the same, but has a slashed zero.
|
| edit: if you hate my font, just don't use it. You don't _have_
| to downvote this. ;-)
| kevwil wrote:
| Thanks. A bit narrow for my tastes but I'm impressed by the
| semi-cursive italic idea. Clever. Giving it a try right now!
| contingencies wrote:
| IMHO Airbus' effort is better. https://github.com/polarsys/b612
|
| Serifs are known to be less readable on screens. Each to their
| own but to me that MonoLisa thing is sort of half-serif... it's
| ... inconsistent and terrible. Possibly a joke.
| hunterb123 wrote:
| Thanks for the resource, that's a cool site!
| jck wrote:
| Thanks for the victor mono recommendation. It looks really
| good! I was blown away by how narrow it was compared to other
| forms in the comparison tool.
|
| Side note: it's a bummer that you never see Monaco on these
| comparison tools. Monaco has been my monospace font of choice
| for many years now despite never owning a Macbook:
| https://github.com/cseelus/monego
| dawei67 wrote:
| looks very bad on non-retina windows display jetbrains mono is
| still the best
| GuB-42 wrote:
| I am the only one who finds fonts a bit expensive for personal
| use? It is not a rant, I am not saying it isn't worth it, that
| font designers can't make money, etc... But that puts it on the
| same level as tools like Sublime Text or Beyond Compare. For me,
| it is enough of a turn off not to use a commercial font,
| especially considering that the free offering is quite good.
|
| I totally understand the higher price for commercial use, here,
| it is cheap compared to the costs of hiring a designer, and it
| may have a real impact on your sales and ultimately earn you
| money.
|
| But why is the price for personal use around $60? Is it some kind
| of a sweet spot because most people won't buy fonts anyways, even
| for $1, but those who do expect to pay that kind of money. Does
| it account for piracy, which I guess is easy and goes unnoticed
| if you only use it personally?
| yilugurlu wrote:
| Same here. I liked it and wanted to buy it, but I didn't want
| to give EUR55. If it was 30 or 28.XX something, I will be using
| it already.
|
| It is nothing rational, just a buyer's reaction to a product
| and its price.
| sytelus wrote:
| Selling font direct to consumers is extremely bad business
| model. This doesn't work. People are not keen on shelling out
| 100s of dollars when IDEs already come with decent fonts and
| other thousands of free fonts readily available. This font
| looks great but most people would argue about marginal benefit.
| I would hope they would partner with IDE makers and big tech
| and give them license to use it for their expected revenue
| instead.
| rbanffy wrote:
| Sorry, but no IDE comes with a proper 3278-like font. Not
| even IBM's Developer for z/OS comes with one (they
| commissioned that other font called Plex... who would take
| seriously a font named after a media player?).
|
| Luckily, everyone can get one at
| https://github.com/rbanffy/3270font.
|
| Note: shameless plug ;-)
| rmbyrro wrote:
| I guess maybe because developers are the target audience and
| they happen to make a lot of money?
| grishka wrote:
| But then developers also know how to use devtools in their
| browser.
| grishka wrote:
| The font is used on the web page itself. You can trivially
| yoink it out of there and install it on your system if you
| really like it. I doubt anyone ever pays for fonts for personal
| use.
| [deleted]
| paulcole wrote:
| > being constrained by the same width of all glyphs can result in
| a boring or unreadable font.
|
| I don't see how "boring" is an issue here. If the whole thing has
| a goal of functionality, why do I care if it's boring? And what
| is a "boring" font anyway?
|
| Reminds me of the Apple-induced desire to call everything
| "stunning" or "beautiful."
| CRConrad wrote:
| > I don't see how "boring" is an issue here. If the whole thing
| has a goal of functionality, why do I care if it's boring?
|
| Exactly. Or actually, to go even further: On the contrary,
| "boring" may well be an issue, but in the sense that that's
| what we _want._ When you write code -- or prose, marketing
| copy, poetry, whatever -- what you want to concentrate on is
| the _content_ of your text, not the esthetic of the
| letterforms. "Boring" is the opposite of "captures your
| attention", and if I want to focus my attention on the meaning
| of groups of letters, "boring" -- _not_ grabbing my attention
| -- is exactly what I want the shapes of the letters themselves
| to be.
|
| And yes, I want them all to be the same width, so I can line up
| repetitive bits of code (or poetry?) below each other and match
| -- _catch_ -- the _non_ -repetitive bits at a glance. (Sorry,
| we can't all write in bone-DRY functional languages; SQL is
| pretty damn verbose and often, yes, repetitive.) IMO that's
| part of the content I want to focus on.
| dokka wrote:
| very cool! it passes the 1IilL0Oo test. I'll give it a try.
| jonpalmisc wrote:
| On the topic of fonts: If your font of choice has it, try using
| the medium weight as the "normal" weight in your editor -- I've
| found I prefer it to the regular weight with most fonts. I
| started doing this after noticing that the default Xcode font is
| SF Mono _Medium_.
| CharlesW wrote:
| For anyone else who wasn't sure which is bolder, Normal/Regular
| is considered weight 400 in CSS while Medium is 500.
| xgme wrote:
| Isn't "increased width" an ungodly sin to the developer lord? If
| anything, we want to see more in a given space, not less...
| zorked wrote:
| Considering we have 80-column conventions and widescreen
| monitors... no?
| qbasic_forever wrote:
| For terminal/console use wide fonts hurt IMHO. I really like
| Iosevka, it even has a terminal optimized version that's
| explicitly less wide: https://typeof.net/Iosevka/
| fictorial wrote:
| Stay away from Vulf Mono then!
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > Isn't "increased width" an ungodly sin to the developer lord?
| If anything we want to see more in a given space, not less...
|
| I think it increases readability. I need to read what I'm
| looking at, not a lot of things I'm not looking at.
| xgme wrote:
| Not if a part of a line is out of the window right? This
| makes splitting harder, therefore, reading harder
| CRConrad wrote:
| Then make your window wider. Bam, problem solved.
|
| "But then I can't see as many windows!" That brings us back
| to the GP's I need to see what I'm looking at, not what I'm
| not looking at". When you want to look at those other
| windows, bring them to the foreground and let them obscure
| this one.
| sidpatil wrote:
| Why not just use word wrapping?
| cortesoft wrote:
| I find reading code with word wrapping nearly impossible.
| xgme wrote:
| I'm already going with 80 or 120 chars per line. Why
| would I word wrap well written code?
|
| Also word wrappings will lose all the preceding tabs. It
| makes it 100x harder to read.
|
| The issue is I will have less split space.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| Seems niche?
|
| I don't think that's enough of a reason to say the design
| choice is a sin for everyone.
| xgme wrote:
| Line length linters are kinda standard. The goal is to
| have "shorter lines".
| bartvk wrote:
| That's how I think about it too. I use Anka/Coder Narrow. It
| takes some getting used to, but may enable using an additional
| editor window at certain monitor sizes.
|
| Another commenter replied that all editors have word wrap, but
| the resulting code doesn't look great, IMHO. I prefer full
| control.
|
| https://fontlibrary.org/en/font/anka-coder-narrow
| the_mitsuhiko wrote:
| Wider fonts are significantly easier to read than narrow fonts
| which is the main point a programmer typically optimizes for.
| Since most editors can reflow anyways and programmers are
| relatively conservatives for max width anyways my general
| experience is that I have more than enough space on the right
| unused.
| kuratkull wrote:
| It's strange, I find the complete opposite to be true. A
| narrower font allows my brain to grasp the line quicker,
| without having to move my eyes as much.
| the_mitsuhiko wrote:
| I would be shocked if this was not up to personal
| preference :)
| huhtenberg wrote:
| This assumes that the code you are writing will actually be
| read by someone later on. A bold assumption to make.
| the_mitsuhiko wrote:
| It's not about posterity but reading back what you just
| wrote a minute ago. That's not a very bold assumption.
| dsmmcken wrote:
| The theme switcher (coloured dots, top right) switching between a
| variety of common editor themes is a nice touch.
| divbzero wrote:
| Is this part about terminals actually true? Or a tad exaggerated
| for marketing?
|
| > _MonoLisa uses open forms and terminals (starting and ending
| points) that are pointing towards the neighboring letters to let
| the eye follow the line of text fluently._
|
| Regardless, I like the font overall. My go-to is Fira Code but
| this might be worth a try.
| deathanatos wrote:
| I'm still not getting how the top of the a isn't pointing to
| the left, completely opposite the arrow they've drawn on it.
|
| (Or, also, that anything like what the site describes actually
| happens. The entire page is [citation needed].)
| vinkelhake wrote:
| If you're willing to spend money on a font for coding, then do
| yourself a favor and take a look at PragmataPro as well. I bought
| a license (checks notes...) 8 years ago and it has served me very
| well.
|
| If I was _not_ down to pay for a font, then I 'd probably use one
| of Iosevka's forms. Personally, however, it became clear to me
| that just like my monitor, the font I spend hours looking at
| every day is also worth some money.
|
| https://fsd.it/shop/fonts/pragmatapro/
| makepanic wrote:
| There's also Iosevka[1] which is open source[2] and also
| similar to Pragmata.
|
| It even has a Pragmata Pro Style.
|
| [1] - https://typeof.net/Iosevka/
|
| [2] - https://github.com/be5invis/Iosevka
| huhtenberg wrote:
| Pragmata Pro is quite nice... but not for coding.
|
| I like narrow fonts. Barlow is excellent. News Gothic is
| fantastic. Geo Grotesque is super beautiful. But it just
| doesn't work for me when a _coding_ font is narrow. Fonts like
| Iosevka and Pragmata are harder to read than needed and for no
| clear benefit. Especially when used for projects based on C and
| derivatives. If you ever find yourself needing to cram more
| symbols per line onto your screen, it 's a sign that there's a
| coding style problem! Lines simply should be short enough to
| not require horizontal compression.
|
| Obviously, YMMV, to each their own, etc.
| lobstrosity420 wrote:
| I keep my code below the 80 column mark, as is common. For
| me, the reason I like the more narrow Iosevka is because it
| lets me have more split buffers open on the same monitor.
| With Iosevka I can have 3 splits with a little over 80
| columns each, other fonts only let me have two. I never
| noticed a decrease in readability but I've been using Iosevka
| for a very long time now, perhaps it's time to try out a
| wider font and see if it's worth it.
| lrei wrote:
| Exactly the same reason why I use Iosevka and 79chars.
| However I use WQHD monitors and fit 4-5 splits.
| electroly wrote:
| Different strokes, I suppose. (Pun intended.)
|
| I like the narrower font so I can fit two side-by-side files
| with full 120 character width each on a regular 16:9 display.
| Iosevka is likely my forever font. I find it both beautiful
| and fit for purpose; I couldn't ask for more.
|
| Re: "lines should be short." I prefer my code font to work
| even for bad code. It's not always _my_ code that I 'm
| looking at!
| jrockway wrote:
| Iosevka is my all-time favorite font. MonoLisa seems to sell
| itself on being "wide", and Iosevka is the opposite of that.
| Each letter is exactly .5em, which is on the very narrow side
| of things as monospaced fonts go. So if this thing appeals to
| you, Iosevka isn't the free alternative you're looking for. But
| if you want the nicest monospaced font in the world, then
| Iosevka is ;)
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| Iosevka also has an "extended" variant you can use, and you
| can create a custom build that has the width you want.
| jrockway wrote:
| I missed that. The website lets you compare it to IBM Plex
| and Fira Code as well. Same width, but a little bit more
| contrast. Compares very favorably if you want wide.
|
| My takeaway is that monospaced fonts are basically a solved
| problem thanks to Iosevka. It does everything. And you can
| mix and match individual glyphs to your exact preferences!
| bitwize wrote:
| Another day, another Letter Gothic lookalike "developer font". I
| do not feel particularly motivated to switch away from the
| terminal bitmap fonts I normally use. There's something about an
| 8x8, 8x16, or similar small numbers grid of pixels -- the
| constraints seemed to breed creativity that you don't see too
| much of anymore in monospaced fonts for coding/terminal use.
| enricozb wrote:
| Curious which bitmap font you use? I use terminus.
| bitwize wrote:
| Terminus is a great one, but right now I'm partial to the
| Atari ST 8x16 font.
| azeirah wrote:
| My favorite font still remains fantasque sans mono. It's loosely
| based on comic sans, I just need a little playful edge in my
| coding job. Otherwise it gets too stale.
|
| Love the font
| triaste wrote:
| I Completely agree! It is my daily driver font. Use it
| everywhere, great for shells too. And it's free
|
| https://github.com/belluzj/fantasque-sans
| roughly wrote:
| > As software developers, we always strive for better tools but
| rarely consider font as such.
|
| ... where have YOU been spending time?
| andjd wrote:
| I'm going to hop on my hobby horse again for a second:
|
| One of their first points is this:
|
| >Designing a monospace font is much harder than a traditional,
| proportional one: being constrained by the same width of all
| glyphs can result in a boring or unreadable font.
|
| And they're absolutely right. But it begs the first-principals
| question-- why code using a monospace font? Today, every major
| editor that isn't terminal-based supports proportional width
| fonts beautifully. It's also incredibly rare to see modern style
| guides that depend on having consistent column widths. In 2022,
| there's no technical reason to code using monospaced fonts. And
| there are a ton of beautiful and readable fonts out there --
| There are probably a dozen pre-installed on your system that are
| more beautiful and readable than this font.
|
| You see this tag line time-and-time again. "A font designed by
| and for software developers." But font design is and art and a
| discipline. Doing it well is very hard.
| moonchrome wrote:
| Proportional fonts break code navigation, moving vertically is
| much more important in code than normal text. Also it's harder
| to line things up, and alignment is a good cue when scanning
| code.
| taeric wrote:
| Is it, though? Important, that is. Can be convenient. But so
| is ace jump. And the latter still works.
| toomanydoubts wrote:
| I had never considered using variable width fonts for
| programming. I can see some minor issues, like vim users(on an
| environment that support variable-width fonts) now have no
| consistency on where their cursor will land when using j/k to
| move up and down lines, but I think I will still try it out.
| chipotle_coyote wrote:
| > And they're absolutely right. But it begs the first-
| principals question-- why code using a monospace font? Today,
| every major editor that isn't terminal-based supports
| proportional width fonts beautifully.
|
| There was a whole "coding font" family designed around the idea
| that we should be using proportional fonts for this, and it
| makes a great case...
|
| https://input.djr.com/info/
|
| ...except that just about every time I've tried this, I've
| quickly run into places where trying to use a proportional font
| creates visual fails. Here's a simple one:
| /** * Render a given template * *
| @param string $_template * @param array $_args
| * @return string */
|
| Put that in a non-proportional font, and the asterisks on the
| first line probably won't line up with the rest. Now think of
| someone doing visual alignment of assignment operators in a
| block of code like you often see in Ruby, or any code following
| the indentation standard where you line up parameters in a
| multi-line function header with the character after the open
| parenthesis like you often see in Python. Speaking of
| parentheses, can you imagine what will happen with proportional
| fonts and Lisp indentation? It'd drive the hardiest Emacs user
| to drink in short order.
|
| Proportional fonts in editors are a good idea whose time
| probably just hasn't yet come. We'd need (a) to have editors
| that support "elastic" or variable tabs to keep things aligned
| in a truly sane fashion, (b) to re-teach a generation or two of
| programmers that indenting with the tab character is good,
| actually, and (c) to develop a few new conventions for what
| makes code look neat and pretty.
| munch117 wrote:
| You may be right on the main point, but I have a quarrel with
| one of your arguments.
|
| > Put that in a non-proportional font, and the asterisks on
| the first line probably won't line up with the rest.
|
| So lose the redundant asterisks. They serve no purpose. They
| make the comment both harder to read and harder to write.
| memco wrote:
| Textmate 2 had some support for proportional width and
| different heights and styles in its early days. Don't know
| how it panned out since I've since stopped using it.
| taeric wrote:
| I do find it hilarious that using tabs with non static tab
| stops basically solved this problem. Anyone that ever typed,
| on a typewriter, almost certainly used controlled tabs to
| line up data. I recall tables were easily done by just seeing
| the tabs correctly then proceeding in standard way.
|
| That said, I don't see my lisp coffee caring that much. Let
| expressions benefit from lining up. Most other code, though?
| Not sure it matters that much.
| kazinator wrote:
| Should we have some tab-stop ruler comment convention that
| the editor will follow from that line until it is changed
| by another such ruler? ;;
| ^-------^---^-----^----------^ (foo (bar
| (x y z)))
|
| :)
| thiht wrote:
| > why code using a monospace font?
|
| Because unlike prose, we don't reason about code in terms of
| words, sentences or paragraphs but rather in terms of
| statements, lines and blocks. Navigating between visual lines
| vertically makes sense when navigating in code. And to optimize
| this kind of navigation, monospace fonts are the best choice
| because where your cursor lands is predictible. It also brings
| cool features such as block selection which you can't implement
| properly with proportional fonts.
| sergiotapia wrote:
| I never even considered people bought fonts for local dev use.
| Sounds pretty steep.
| zestyping wrote:
| Please stop it with the "coding ligatures" already. They are not
| helpful and only serve to obscure the code being written.
|
| This has got to be one of my least favourite trends in
| programming aesthetics these days. For a font claiming to "follow
| function" to devote so much effort to sacrificing function for
| the _vogue du jour_ is especially rich.
| kbd wrote:
| <opinion>They are not helpful and only serve to
| obscure...</opinion>
|
| Personally -- after originally thinking like you -- I really
| enjoy ligatures in my code. I disable them for my terminal
| though.
|
| The same font can work both with and without ligatures, so it's
| not a negative if a font supports them. You can choose whether
| to enable them.
| stormking wrote:
| I don't understand how they can advertise this font being "wider"
| than other ones. I skipped all those modern Programming Fonts
| because none of them is as condensed and readable as "TheSans
| Mono Condensed".
|
| That font is terrible because its basically still ASCII only, but
| I use it everywhere. I would pay good money for a Unicode
| version.
| bussierem wrote:
| The comparison to Fira Code is hilarious, basically no deviation
| except 'r'. Just go use Fira Code it's at least free
| andrewl-hn wrote:
| I looked at it a few years ago and dismissed it because it's so
| similar to Source Code Pro in terms of spacing, size and overall
| feel. Source Code Pro is an excellent wide font that I've been
| using since its release about a decade ago. And it's free, and
| there are Nerd Font variants with ligatures if you're into that.
|
| I noticed that MonaLisa added script variant last year, so if you
| want something like that in your editor it's a very good choice.
| In fact, I'd recommend it over Operator Mono (the OG monospaced
| font with scripted italics), because the later has a much smaller
| character set.
|
| Or, pick a free Victor Mono if you like narrower symbols. Alas,
| us - wide font users - have to pay for a script italics :)
| ashton314 wrote:
| > As software developers, we always strive for better tools but
| rarely consider font as such.
|
| Meanwhile, I look at new coding fonts on at least a monthly
| basis. Nothing beats Input Mono [^1] for me; I actually like
| wider fonts, so I might take this one out for a spin.
|
| [^1]: https://input.djr.com/
| speedgoose wrote:
| Since we are talking about our favourite coding fonts, my
| personal choice is on Comic Code. I find it very easy to read and
| better than the other mono comic sans fonts.
|
| https://tosche.net/fonts/comic-code
| sebastianconcpt wrote:
| Oh god... I can't say if you're trolling or not.
| StevePerkins wrote:
| I honestly can't tell much difference between this, and the
| new "Cascadia Code" font that Microsoft recently put out. If
| they didn't put "Comic" in the name, then no one would likely
| think twice about it. On the other hand, the notoriety of
| that name probably helps them draw attention, too.
| CharlesW wrote:
| There might be something to it.
|
| _To wit, Comic Sans is recommended by the British Dyslexia
| Association and the Dyslexia Association of Ireland. An
| American Institute of Graphic Arts post from last summer said
| that it might be the best font for dyslexics, given its
| "character disambiguation" and "variation in letter heights".
| While other fonts have been specifically designed to be read
| by people with dyslexia -- Dyslexie and OpenDyslexic are two
| -- they just don't have the availability of Comic Sans. To
| hate on Comic Sans is "ableist", Hudgins argues, and doing so
| discounts the reading difficulties of millions of people._
|
| https://www.thecut.com/2020/08/the-reason-comic-sans-is-a-
| pu...
| speedgoose wrote:
| I'm really using this font everyday since about two years. I
| remember setting the font in vscode and testing comic sans ms
| for fun, just to see. To my surprise it wasn't that bad for
| me but of course not monospaced. So I looked at monospaced
| fonts inspired by comic sans ms, you have a few free ones on
| GitHub, and I ended up with comic code relatively quick.
| [deleted]
| nerdponx wrote:
| This is great. I already tend to go for "curly" fonts like
| this: Recursive Mono ("Casual" or "Duotone" presets), Fantasque
| Sans Mono, and Mononoki.
|
| MonoLisa seems to fall into a similar category. Is there a name
| for this style?
| kbd wrote:
| Highly recommend Fantasque Sans Mono for a realistic take on
| the "comic-style" coding font -
| https://github.com/belluzj/fantasque-sans
| timfi wrote:
| This may seem like a minor nitpick but it's something that popped
| out at me: italisizing a font shouldn't add or remove serifs.
| There is a reason why Unicode defines both sans- and serif
| versions of italics.
| michaklang wrote:
| Holy macaroni! Looks awesome!
| shmerl wrote:
| It tired a bunch of different fonts, but nothing felt as good as
| Dejavu Sans Mono.
| flobosg wrote:
| The whitespace only ligatures look like an interesting idea and a
| good alternative to full ones.
| diputsmonro wrote:
| I feel like I'm the only person who hates ligatures in coding
| fonts, but I agree that these whitespace ligatures are (mostly)
| a good compromise.
| StevePerkins wrote:
| I wonder how many people glancing at the landing page have
| browsed over to the download page, and discovered that this a
| paid font? To the tune of $69 to $239, depending on the options
| you want.
|
| If this were something really revolutionary, then okay. But this
| looks like every other Bitstream Vera Sans Mono variant, just
| tweaked to be a touch wider than Fira Code or Jetbrains Mono. But
| half of the fonts on https://www.programmingfonts.org are
| Bitstream Vera Sans Mono variants, a touch wider than Fira Code
| or Jetbrains Mono. And they're all open source and free.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| moffkalast wrote:
| People charging $199 for a slightly wider Lucida Console, you
| can't make this shit up. The marketing is so outrageous.
|
| In case someone's seriously considering this, here are an
| additional two sites that have literally hundreds of CC0 and
| other free to use fonts, not just monospace:
|
| https://www.1001freefonts.com
|
| http://allfont.net
|
| DIN 1451 Mittelschrift is my personal favorite.
| monkeycantype wrote:
| I wanted to let you know I'm upvoting you, not for the useful
| links you have provided, but because I also love DIN, to an
| unreasonable degree, like the kind of feeling that makes
| someone otherwise totally rational marry a pokemon.
|
| When I was about 20, after the Berlin wall came down, I rode
| my bike round berlin, then all round east then west Germany
| for three months, sleeping rough in the forest most of the
| time, and I think the font, on road signs everywhere, soaked
| into me as linked to that summer.
|
| But you know what really creeps me about this font. It has a
| history dating back to the start of the 20th century as
| letterforms for hand painted signs, but Deutsche
| Industrienorm 1451 was created in 1936, the year of the of
| the Berlin Olympics, concentration camps had been open for
| three years, Triumph of the Will was released the year
| before. If you've never seen 'Triumph of the Will' it's an
| experience, I'd never understood how the fascists had managed
| to appeal to enough people to actually win an election, but
| in that film you see how they presented themselves to the
| people of Germany at the time and it was sophisticated.
| There's a moment in the film in which hilter interacts with
| an unemployed labourer, and in that interaction he imbues
| this guy with a sense of purpose, hitler has told him he is a
| soldier - a soldier with a shovel, it's nonsense, but it is
| carefully crafted nonsense. It seems to me that DIN is part
| of this carefully crafted propaganda, a tool to help project
| an vision of Nazi Germany as rational, orderly, scientific,
| rigorous and correct. And it does the job, like the
| unemployed labourer, I respond to it exactly the way goebbels
| would want me to.
|
| I know I can use a Roman road without endorsing the invasion
| of Gaul, but there's still a horror there millennia later.
| CRConrad wrote:
| > There's a moment in the film in which hilter interacts
| with an unemployed labourer, and in that interaction he
| imbues this guy with a sense of purpose, hitler has told
| him he is a soldier - a soldier with a shovel, it's
| nonsense, but it is carefully crafted nonsense.
|
| Well, maybe not _total_ nonsense? The same kind of thing
| seems to have worked elsewhere too:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_Progress_Administration
| drewzero1 wrote:
| I love the DIN family but haven't been able to find a
| monospaced variant for coding/terminal use. I'd add Abstract
| Fonts[1] to the list, though you have to watch the license
| (many are only free for personal/non-commercial use).
|
| [1] https://www.abstractfonts.com/
| thor_molecules wrote:
| If you like symbols and fancy terminal stuff, I'd also like
| to recommend any of the Nerd Fonts - all free.
|
| https://www.nerdfonts.com/
| john_alan wrote:
| Superb. Love this font.
| zestyping wrote:
| Oof. Yeah, I do love the squared capital D in the DIN family,
| but the "ft" in Mittelschrift is a car crash.
| notum wrote:
| It looks like a lovely font, a shame about the price. They
| have, however, included it into their website and distributed
| it to my browser for free, without asking me first:
| https://www.monolisa.dev/api/fonts/initial
|
| According to the EULA the font is now mine under the term "by
| downloading the software accompanying this license".
|
| Correct me if I'm wrong please. /s
| vmception wrote:
| _yoink!_
|
| I saved the EULA in case your interpretation is accurate and
| the EULA changes.
| turtlebits wrote:
| IMO, this is one of the rare programming fonts that actually
| looks great to me. I use Operator which is also a paid font. I
| used Source Code Pro for a short while and never really like
| any of the other free offerings.
| IgorPartola wrote:
| Also, how many people who regularly browse HN have seen a
| headline like "[Font Name] - A font designed for developers"?
| As a mild font nerd, I love that people keep making more fonts.
| But also:
|
| https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
| kevwil wrote:
| - While the effort to create fonts is not trivial and should be
| rewarded, this seems expensive. I've bought fonts before, but
| they were like $5-15, not $100. - It's fantastic to see the
| variety of human experience on display in the wide variety of
| font preferences. I used to thing "why to we need more than one?"
| LOL - My favorite so far is Source Code Pro.
| lanewinfield wrote:
| I'm a big fan of Input Sans as well: https://djr.com/input/
| lifeplusplus wrote:
| I will never use a font like this wider? hieroglyphs?? LOL no
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-02-14 23:00 UTC)