3 ms·

Besides the good points about the difficulty typing characters, not all fonts have good glyphs for non-alphanumeric (by that I mean low ASCII) characters. Somet

Besides the good points about the difficulty typing characters, not all fonts have good glyphs for non-alphanumeric (by that I mean low ASCII) characters. Sometimes they don't have those glyphs at all and the system has to go to a fallback font. Terminals can also shit the bed with Unicode characters. The solutions to those problems is to use better fonts, terminals, and editors. Using Unicode characters is fine but some people do have legitimate problems with them.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> Besides the good points about the difficulty typing characters, not all fonts have good glyphs for non-alphanumeric (by that I mean low ASCII) characters Not all fonts are good fonts for an evey use use; heck, not all fonts make 0 and O or 1 and l and I clearly distinguishable. > The solutions to those problems is to use better fonts, terminals, and editors Exactly.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
cbkeller 5y ago
On that topic, I'll throw in a shoutout to Cormullion's excellent JuliaMono font [1,2]! Typing certainly does add more friction between u and µ than a chalkboard would, though it is perhaps also notable that mathematicians seem to have felt that it's worth the effort, and have come up with a quite nice system for it in LaTeX -- and I would certainly not mind seeing more languages and editors add support for LaTeX completions the way the Julia ecosystem has. [1] https://juliamono.netlify.app/ https://juliamono.netlify.app/ [2] https://github.com/cormullion/juliamono https://github.com/cormullion/juliamono