5 ms·

Hack is DejaVu sans mono. Below is a gif I took switching between DejaVu sans mono and Hack. Aside from line height I fail to see the difference. http://gfyc

by dogas 11y ago

Hack is DejaVu sans mono. Below is a gif I took switching between DejaVu sans mono and Hack. Aside from line height I fail to see the difference. http://gfycat.com/SomberUnitedGermanshepherd http://gfycat.com/SomberUnitedGermanshepherd

timbre 11y ago
"i" is different. Don't see anything else though.
- cokernel 11y ago
  Comma and colon are also quite different.
- tptacek 11y ago
  Top of the lowercase 't'.
- andreasvc 11y ago
  Hack's "i" is not an improvement IMHO, they made it less distinctive from "l".
  - michaelmior 11y ago
    I feel like the tail on the i is too long.
    - campers 11y ago
      That was the one thing that stood out for me too
cokernel 11y ago
For the first obvious difference, watch the 'i' in 'login'.
jmtulloss 11y ago
If you look more closely you'll see that many of the glyphs are changed, most subtly. The lowercase "i" is the most significant change I saw.
onosendai 11y ago
They do acknowledge the source of the font: "Hack has deep roots in the libre, open source typeface community and includes the contributions of the Bitstream Vera & DejaVu projects." It's a bit disingenuous though. I'd call Hack a straight copy of Deja Vu Sans Mono, with a few very minor tweaks. On Linux using the TTF fonts I can't even see a difference in line height: http://i.imgur.com/wxTr0at.png http://i.imgur.com/wxTr0at.png http://i.imgur.com/OO1bJFE.png http://i.imgur.com/OO1bJFE.png The only glyphs I can tell which are slightly different are 'i', '0' and '_'.
- mistercow 11y ago
  "," too
- drivingmenuts 11y ago
  In any other medium, we might call that plagiarism.
  - kaoD 11y ago
    Fortunately we can call that a fork, since they comply with the license. https://github.com/chrissimpkins/Hack/blob/master/LICENSE.md https://github.com/chrissimpkins/Hack/blob/master/LICENSE.md
    - adrusi 11y ago
      Copyright infringement != plagiarism. They're not violating the copyright because they abide by the terms of the license. They're also not plagiarising because they clearly cite its original source. They even go so far as to say "deeply rooted in" which seems to me like a euphamism for "virtually identical to". The point here isn't that it's illegal or immoral, just kind of uninteresting.
      - kaoD 11y ago
        If, for example, someone repackaged a public domain font without attributing source, I wouldn't call that plagiarism either. In my definition of plagiarism it implies unauthorized use (i.e. not complying with the license) but I guess that's open to interpretation. So it'd still be uninteresting, unimaginative, not original work... but not plagiarism.
kordless 11y ago
Latin changelog here: https://github.com/chrissimpkins/Hack/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#modified-glyphs https://github.com/chrissimpkins/Hack/blob/master/CHANGELOG.....
untog 11y ago
There are some very minor changes, but this got me thinking about tricky fonts are compared to software development in general. You can fork a font on GitHub and make some changes, but you can't really merge them back into the original font because fonts are expected to be entirely static. Perhaps they could accept pull requests for a DejaVu 2 or something.
- gkoberger 11y ago
  It doesn't work for Helvetica or Arial, but less-famous typefaces can change pretty significantly over time: http://www.fastcodesign.com/3033126/roboto-rebooted-why-google-plans-to-update-its-font-like-the-rest-of-its-products http://www.fastcodesign.com/3033126/roboto-rebooted-why-goog...
  - ademarre 11y ago
    Interesting. I hadn't thought of that before, but those examples seem to embody the struggle in the transition from classic print design to modern digital mediums. I imagine someday we'll see more typefaces versioned like software, instead of alterations receiving new names. Or is this already happening?
mistercow 11y ago
Lowercase and i hyphen are very different. Some other characters I'd have to see better aligned to tell.
damcedami 11y ago
So that's why my editor is not changed at all after using Hack, I feel guilty blaming my editor, I thought it's broken.
anantzoid 11y ago
If it's not very different from DejaVu Sans mono, why not use the latter itself in the first place?

by dogas 11y ago

timbre 11y ago

"i" is different. Don't see anything else though.

cokernel 11y ago
Comma and colon are also quite different.
tptacek 11y ago
Top of the lowercase 't'.
andreasvc 11y ago
Hack's "i" is not an improvement IMHO, they made it less distinctive from "l".
- michaelmior 11y ago
  I feel like the tail on the i is too long.
  - campers 11y ago
    That was the one thing that stood out for me too

cokernel 11y ago

For the first obvious difference, watch the 'i' in 'login'.

jmtulloss 11y ago

If you look more closely you'll see that many of the glyphs are changed, most subtly. The lowercase "i" is the most significant change I saw.

onosendai 11y ago

They do acknowledge the source of the font: "Hack has deep roots in the libre, open source typeface community and includes the contributions of the Bitstream Vera & DejaVu projects." It's a bit disingenuous though. I'd call Hack a straight copy of Deja Vu Sans Mono, with a few very minor tweaks. On Linux using the TTF fonts I can't even see a difference in line height: http://i.imgur.com/wxTr0at.png http://i.imgur.com/wxTr0at.png http://i.imgur.com/OO1bJFE.png http://i.imgur.com/OO1bJFE.png The only glyphs I can tell which are slightly different are 'i', '0' and '_'.

mistercow 11y ago
"," too
drivingmenuts 11y ago
In any other medium, we might call that plagiarism.
- kaoD 11y ago
  Fortunately we can call that a fork, since they comply with the license. https://github.com/chrissimpkins/Hack/blob/master/LICENSE.md https://github.com/chrissimpkins/Hack/blob/master/LICENSE.md
  - adrusi 11y ago
    Copyright infringement != plagiarism. They're not violating the copyright because they abide by the terms of the license. They're also not plagiarising because they clearly cite its original source. They even go so far as to say "deeply rooted in" which seems to me like a euphamism for "virtually identical to". The point here isn't that it's illegal or immoral, just kind of uninteresting.
    - kaoD 11y ago
      If, for example, someone repackaged a public domain font without attributing source, I wouldn't call that plagiarism either. In my definition of plagiarism it implies unauthorized use (i.e. not complying with the license) but I guess that's open to interpretation. So it'd still be uninteresting, unimaginative, not original work... but not plagiarism.

kordless 11y ago

Latin changelog here: https://github.com/chrissimpkins/Hack/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#modified-glyphs https://github.com/chrissimpkins/Hack/blob/master/CHANGELOG.....

untog 11y ago

There are some very minor changes, but this got me thinking about tricky fonts are compared to software development in general. You can fork a font on GitHub and make some changes, but you can't really merge them back into the original font because fonts are expected to be entirely static. Perhaps they could accept pull requests for a DejaVu 2 or something.

gkoberger 11y ago
It doesn't work for Helvetica or Arial, but less-famous typefaces can change pretty significantly over time: http://www.fastcodesign.com/3033126/roboto-rebooted-why-google-plans-to-update-its-font-like-the-rest-of-its-products http://www.fastcodesign.com/3033126/roboto-rebooted-why-goog...
- ademarre 11y ago
  Interesting. I hadn't thought of that before, but those examples seem to embody the struggle in the transition from classic print design to modern digital mediums. I imagine someday we'll see more typefaces versioned like software, instead of alterations receiving new names. Or is this already happening?

mistercow 11y ago

Lowercase and i hyphen are very different. Some other characters I'd have to see better aligned to tell.

damcedami 11y ago

So that's why my editor is not changed at all after using Hack, I feel guilty blaming my editor, I thought it's broken.

anantzoid 11y ago

If it's not very different from DejaVu Sans mono, why not use the latter itself in the first place?