5 ms·
The difficult to distinguish 0's and O's are still the worst part of this. It's supposed to be for numbers focused things, come on.
by SanchoPanda 6y ago
The difficult to distinguish 0's and O's are still the worst part of this. It's supposed to be for numbers focused things, come on.
- thaumasiotes 6y ago> It's supposed to be for numbers focused things, come on. It's not supposed to be for programming. If the 0 and O glyphs were identical, where would that confuse a reader, in a numbers-focused document?
- jrockway 6y agoFor programming, this is why I name variables "foo" and "bar" and not "FO0" and "F0O". Really opens up the range of fonts you can use.
- elliekelly 6y agoContracts. I’ve run into the issue trying to reference paragraph 2O vs paragraph 20. (Paragraph 2 is often definitions and tends to get lengthy.)
- thaumasiotes 6y agoThat's a good example. It makes me curious about such nested references, though -- in my mind, they usually look something like 2.III.O, or 2(III)(O), or the like.
- elliekelly 6y agoThat’s definitely how they would usually be referenced but when it’s crunch time and you’re firing emails back and forth trying to hammer out the details that tends to fall by the wayside. Especially on mobile. And 99% of the time it’s clear enough. 2(B) or 2B doesn’t leave much room for confusion but oh man did those missing parens on the O cause us a lot of confusion about version control.
- SanchoPanda 6y agoI meant finance and investment analysis, not programming.