4 ms·
Once I got used to ligatures, they did aid flow for me. -> now needs more internal “rendering” than → does. Same with ≡ vs ===
by modernerd 7y ago
Once I got used to ligatures, they did aid flow for me.
-> now needs more internal “rendering” than → does.
Same with ≡ vs ===
- seemslegit 7y agoThat's not a very good thing, especially considering that there are (probably ?) actual unicode characters '→' and '≡' that are not valid syntax for -> and === in languages that utilize the later.
- true_religion 7y agoGood for who? In an IDE the person reading them knows what don’t they are using, and so won’t get confused. The IDE itself knows what language the code is in and will highlight invalid syntax.
- modernerd 7y agoLanguages like Agda allow → or -> interchangeably in the body of the code: https://agda.readthedocs.io/en/v2.5.2/language/lexical-structure.html#tokens https://agda.readthedocs.io/en/v2.5.2/language/lexical-struc... Most languages only allow such symbols in strings, though, so it's pretty simple: - Symbols outside of a string literal are ligatures. - Symbols inside strings are the real symbol. Ligatures are also rendered differently to any similar unicode characters.