4 ms·

I am sad to hear that much negativity here on HN. I mean, sure - it's about aesthetics and some people may have strong feelings about that (not, it's not "objec

by stared 7y ago

I am sad to hear that much negativity here on HN. I mean, sure - it's about aesthetics and some people may have strong feelings about that (not, it's not "objective"!). At the same time - it is a free font, which you can use if you like it. It is not a new standard you have to follow. It this case I would understand the outrage. Personally, I feel like a traditionalist (full !==, no italics, etc). But... find these experiments with programming fonts refreshing. Also, I remember times (not long ago!), when having a highlighted font in Sublime Text was considered inferior to the "traditional way" of monochrome in Vim or Emacs. Times change (I wanted to put here a "Times New Roman" pun).

dvt 7y ago
I feel you're throwing some shade my way (which is fine), but I just want to re-iterate that cursive is indeed objectively more difficult to read. This has been quantified since (at least) 1929[1]. But there are more recent sources[2] as well. [1] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00220671.1929.10879960 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00220671.1929.10... [2] https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2013/08/31/why-cursive-hard-read/R3dpwR81OL3PBTYQpXqT6O/story.html https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2013/08/31/why-cursive-har...
- stared 7y ago
  Thanks for the references. However, the context may be different. I.e. it is different to talk about reading a whole paragraph in cursive and to have a single word in cursive (here it adds, well, emphasis). Compare: I bet that reading an intensely colored paragraph harder (personally, I hate reading long blocks of texts in color). At the same time, many people (myself included) use code highlighting.
- nurettin 7y ago
  I will use the "just try it out" method no matter how intensely you believe that studies performed on fonts during the pre-ww2 era relate to modern programming.
  - stared 7y ago
    In general, studies measure the average effect. Usually, there is a lot of variances, so even if on average something is worse, for some individuals it is better.

by stared 7y ago

dvt 7y ago

I feel you're throwing some shade my way (which is fine), but I just want to re-iterate that cursive is indeed objectively more difficult to read. This has been quantified since (at least) 1929[1]. But there are more recent sources[2] as well. [1] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00220671.1929.10879960 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00220671.1929.10... [2] https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2013/08/31/why-cursive-hard-read/R3dpwR81OL3PBTYQpXqT6O/story.html https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2013/08/31/why-cursive-har...

stared 7y ago
Thanks for the references. However, the context may be different. I.e. it is different to talk about reading a whole paragraph in cursive and to have a single word in cursive (here it adds, well, emphasis). Compare: I bet that reading an intensely colored paragraph harder (personally, I hate reading long blocks of texts in color). At the same time, many people (myself included) use code highlighting.
nurettin 7y ago
I will use the "just try it out" method no matter how intensely you believe that studies performed on fonts during the pre-ww2 era relate to modern programming.
- stared 7y ago
  In general, studies measure the average effect. Usually, there is a lot of variances, so even if on average something is worse, for some individuals it is better.