[HN Gopher] MonoLisa - A font designed for developers ___________________________________________________________________ MonoLisa - A font designed for developers Author : qubitcoder Score : 200 points Date : 2022-02-14 19:15 UTC (3 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.monolisa.dev) (TXT) w3m dump (www.monolisa.dev) | pianoben wrote: | The first font with a pre-existing theme song: | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMH96B8QWcc | mortenjorck wrote: | What I like most about this font is that it has a completely | different aesthetic from my favorite monospace, JetBrains mono. | It has more of the humanist flavor of a Frutiger versus the DIN- | like rationalism most monospace fonts adopt. | rubyist5eva wrote: | this is too expensive, I would pay $40 | mikojan wrote: | Not a fan of these sharp modern faces in general. However, the | small text in this one looks particularly "smudgy". | | I stopped hopping monospace fonts when I discovered Go Mono. Go | Mono does not seem to get blurry even at small sizes. M, m, n | always look impeccable. Not so here. | | I'm not sure. Maybe something is wrong with the text-rendering in | my browser. | cercatrova wrote: | Do people really care that much about editor fonts? I just use SF | Mono and call it a day. I've never had a problem where the font, | of all things, was the main cause of something not working for | me. | imglorp wrote: | No, sorry fontographers, but I can't tell the difference | between the scores of mono fonts created in the last half dozen | years. As long as it's kinda pleasing and can easily see the | differences between () and {}, 1iIlL| and oO0, I'm all set. | cortesoft wrote: | It's definitely something some people care about, although I am | certainly in the camp of not caring at all. I have no idea what | font my IDE uses, and I have never thought about changing it. | the_mitsuhiko wrote: | If you're looking your day at nothing else but text it's the | most obvious thing to spend time and money on to improve. Sure, | it's an utilitarian thing at the end of the day, but why should | it not look pleasant to your eyes? | | I don't think I ever had _a problem_ with a font, but that does | not mean I do not want to spend a bit of time and effort to | improve my experience. I could probably also get away with a | much worse keyboard or monitor and be just as productive. But | would I enjoy it just as much? Probably not. | moffkalast wrote: | Idk, putting the $199 towards buying a nicer monitor seems | like the pro gamer move. There are billions of free fonts out | there. | the_mitsuhiko wrote: | I'm not sure what you're referring to. The font is a one | time purchase and significantly cheaper than a new monitor. | Both things (a better monitor and a better font) can make | you enjoy the things you're doing more. | | Yes, there might be billions of free fonts out there, but | the cost of that font is also not exactly making a huge | impact for me that I have to save money there. Why would I | start saving with the font all the sudden when I spend more | money on literally everything else? Does not really compute | to me. | toiletfuneral wrote: | pc86 wrote: | The point is to make little things a little nicer, that's all. | [deleted] | josefrichter wrote: | I am one of those using this font for ~1 year now, very happy | with it. As a designer/developer with penchant for typography I | am the perfect target customer I guess. | maupin wrote: | Looks good, but I'm still in love with Consolas. | bjornsteffanson wrote: | Same. You might find Inconsolata interesting, too: | https://github.com/googlefonts/Inconsolata | zppln wrote: | I thought this was gonna be yet another monospace font I wouldn't | be able to tell from all the others, but fuck me as soon as the | page loaded this one just spoke to me. Grabbing this for sure, | well done! | jay_kyburz wrote: | There is a font on my KDE desktop called just "Monospace" and its | a great font. | | I can't find a font file called Monospace. Does anybody know what | the font is? I would love to have it on my windows machine. | anuragsoni wrote: | Different distributions pick different defaults for | `Monospace`. If you are using KDE on ubuntu, `Monospace` might | be pointing to `Ubuntu Mono`. On other linux distros if they | are sticking to KDE defaults, then Monospace will point to Hack | [1] | | [1] https://sourcefoundry.org/hack/ | michaelmrose wrote: | I'm guessing this is just whatever the default monospace font | is rather than being a font called Monospace. | gatonegro wrote: | I'm pretty sure the default "monospace" font in KDE is mapped | to Hack: https://sourcefoundry.org/hack/ | kbd wrote: | Unfortunately not available to compare on | https://www.programmingfonts.org/ | | While I'm here: Victor Mono has been my programming font of | choice for a while now: https://rubjo.github.io/victor-mono/ | | Oh, look at that, the Victor Mono homepage has a font comparison | slider that allows you to compare it to MonoLisa! MonoLisa | advertises that it's wider than other monospace fonts, and you | can really see that in the comparison. One of the things I | appreciate about Victor Mono is that it is _narrower_ than many | other monospace fonts (while still being very readable), allowing | you to fit more code side-by-side. | Ezku wrote: | Oh, this was a new one for me. | | In case you like narrow but Victor's not your thing, I can | enthusiastically point you towards Iosevka. (That's also | available in Victor's comparison picker. Nice!) | daliusd wrote: | I love both Iosevka and Victor Mono, but ended using Victor | Mono because it has script version for italics. | byteski wrote: | Does Victor Mono have nerd font support? Bc Iosevka does | kbd wrote: | $ brew tap-info "homebrew/cask-fonts" --json | jq -r | '.[].cask_tokens[]' | rg victor homebrew/cask- | fonts/font-victor-mono-nerd-font homebrew/cask- | fonts/font-victor-mono | rbanffy wrote: | I don't know why anyone would even bother to even go beyond the | first item on the list. Such beauty, such elegant geometry, | such timeless classic lines. Truly an elegant font for a more | civilized time. | | https://www.programmingfonts.org/#font3270 | | BTW, I'm also a huge fan of Luxi Mono, but I edit it and add a | dot in the middle of the zero to make it different from the O. | I like it because it reminds me a bit of the Sun console font | (which I always forget the name). I could also go with Go Mono, | which is mostly the same, but has a slashed zero. | | edit: if you hate my font, just don't use it. You don't _have_ | to downvote this. ;-) | kevwil wrote: | Thanks. A bit narrow for my tastes but I'm impressed by the | semi-cursive italic idea. Clever. Giving it a try right now! | contingencies wrote: | IMHO Airbus' effort is better. https://github.com/polarsys/b612 | | Serifs are known to be less readable on screens. Each to their | own but to me that MonoLisa thing is sort of half-serif... it's | ... inconsistent and terrible. Possibly a joke. | hunterb123 wrote: | Thanks for the resource, that's a cool site! | jck wrote: | Thanks for the victor mono recommendation. It looks really | good! I was blown away by how narrow it was compared to other | forms in the comparison tool. | | Side note: it's a bummer that you never see Monaco on these | comparison tools. Monaco has been my monospace font of choice | for many years now despite never owning a Macbook: | https://github.com/cseelus/monego | dawei67 wrote: | looks very bad on non-retina windows display jetbrains mono is | still the best | GuB-42 wrote: | I am the only one who finds fonts a bit expensive for personal | use? It is not a rant, I am not saying it isn't worth it, that | font designers can't make money, etc... But that puts it on the | same level as tools like Sublime Text or Beyond Compare. For me, | it is enough of a turn off not to use a commercial font, | especially considering that the free offering is quite good. | | I totally understand the higher price for commercial use, here, | it is cheap compared to the costs of hiring a designer, and it | may have a real impact on your sales and ultimately earn you | money. | | But why is the price for personal use around $60? Is it some kind | of a sweet spot because most people won't buy fonts anyways, even | for $1, but those who do expect to pay that kind of money. Does | it account for piracy, which I guess is easy and goes unnoticed | if you only use it personally? | yilugurlu wrote: | Same here. I liked it and wanted to buy it, but I didn't want | to give EUR55. If it was 30 or 28.XX something, I will be using | it already. | | It is nothing rational, just a buyer's reaction to a product | and its price. | sytelus wrote: | Selling font direct to consumers is extremely bad business | model. This doesn't work. People are not keen on shelling out | 100s of dollars when IDEs already come with decent fonts and | other thousands of free fonts readily available. This font | looks great but most people would argue about marginal benefit. | I would hope they would partner with IDE makers and big tech | and give them license to use it for their expected revenue | instead. | rbanffy wrote: | Sorry, but no IDE comes with a proper 3278-like font. Not | even IBM's Developer for z/OS comes with one (they | commissioned that other font called Plex... who would take | seriously a font named after a media player?). | | Luckily, everyone can get one at | https://github.com/rbanffy/3270font. | | Note: shameless plug ;-) | rmbyrro wrote: | I guess maybe because developers are the target audience and | they happen to make a lot of money? | grishka wrote: | But then developers also know how to use devtools in their | browser. | grishka wrote: | The font is used on the web page itself. You can trivially | yoink it out of there and install it on your system if you | really like it. I doubt anyone ever pays for fonts for personal | use. | [deleted] | paulcole wrote: | > being constrained by the same width of all glyphs can result in | a boring or unreadable font. | | I don't see how "boring" is an issue here. If the whole thing has | a goal of functionality, why do I care if it's boring? And what | is a "boring" font anyway? | | Reminds me of the Apple-induced desire to call everything | "stunning" or "beautiful." | CRConrad wrote: | > I don't see how "boring" is an issue here. If the whole thing | has a goal of functionality, why do I care if it's boring? | | Exactly. Or actually, to go even further: On the contrary, | "boring" may well be an issue, but in the sense that that's | what we _want._ When you write code -- or prose, marketing | copy, poetry, whatever -- what you want to concentrate on is | the _content_ of your text, not the esthetic of the | letterforms. "Boring" is the opposite of "captures your | attention", and if I want to focus my attention on the meaning | of groups of letters, "boring" -- _not_ grabbing my attention | -- is exactly what I want the shapes of the letters themselves | to be. | | And yes, I want them all to be the same width, so I can line up | repetitive bits of code (or poetry?) below each other and match | -- _catch_ -- the _non_ -repetitive bits at a glance. (Sorry, | we can't all write in bone-DRY functional languages; SQL is | pretty damn verbose and often, yes, repetitive.) IMO that's | part of the content I want to focus on. | dokka wrote: | very cool! it passes the 1IilL0Oo test. I'll give it a try. | jonpalmisc wrote: | On the topic of fonts: If your font of choice has it, try using | the medium weight as the "normal" weight in your editor -- I've | found I prefer it to the regular weight with most fonts. I | started doing this after noticing that the default Xcode font is | SF Mono _Medium_. | CharlesW wrote: | For anyone else who wasn't sure which is bolder, Normal/Regular | is considered weight 400 in CSS while Medium is 500. | xgme wrote: | Isn't "increased width" an ungodly sin to the developer lord? If | anything, we want to see more in a given space, not less... | zorked wrote: | Considering we have 80-column conventions and widescreen | monitors... no? | qbasic_forever wrote: | For terminal/console use wide fonts hurt IMHO. I really like | Iosevka, it even has a terminal optimized version that's | explicitly less wide: https://typeof.net/Iosevka/ | fictorial wrote: | Stay away from Vulf Mono then! | chrisseaton wrote: | > Isn't "increased width" an ungodly sin to the developer lord? | If anything we want to see more in a given space, not less... | | I think it increases readability. I need to read what I'm | looking at, not a lot of things I'm not looking at. | xgme wrote: | Not if a part of a line is out of the window right? This | makes splitting harder, therefore, reading harder | CRConrad wrote: | Then make your window wider. Bam, problem solved. | | "But then I can't see as many windows!" That brings us back | to the GP's I need to see what I'm looking at, not what I'm | not looking at". When you want to look at those other | windows, bring them to the foreground and let them obscure | this one. | sidpatil wrote: | Why not just use word wrapping? | cortesoft wrote: | I find reading code with word wrapping nearly impossible. | xgme wrote: | I'm already going with 80 or 120 chars per line. Why | would I word wrap well written code? | | Also word wrappings will lose all the preceding tabs. It | makes it 100x harder to read. | | The issue is I will have less split space. | chrisseaton wrote: | Seems niche? | | I don't think that's enough of a reason to say the design | choice is a sin for everyone. | xgme wrote: | Line length linters are kinda standard. The goal is to | have "shorter lines". | bartvk wrote: | That's how I think about it too. I use Anka/Coder Narrow. It | takes some getting used to, but may enable using an additional | editor window at certain monitor sizes. | | Another commenter replied that all editors have word wrap, but | the resulting code doesn't look great, IMHO. I prefer full | control. | | https://fontlibrary.org/en/font/anka-coder-narrow | the_mitsuhiko wrote: | Wider fonts are significantly easier to read than narrow fonts | which is the main point a programmer typically optimizes for. | Since most editors can reflow anyways and programmers are | relatively conservatives for max width anyways my general | experience is that I have more than enough space on the right | unused. | kuratkull wrote: | It's strange, I find the complete opposite to be true. A | narrower font allows my brain to grasp the line quicker, | without having to move my eyes as much. | the_mitsuhiko wrote: | I would be shocked if this was not up to personal | preference :) | huhtenberg wrote: | This assumes that the code you are writing will actually be | read by someone later on. A bold assumption to make. | the_mitsuhiko wrote: | It's not about posterity but reading back what you just | wrote a minute ago. That's not a very bold assumption. | dsmmcken wrote: | The theme switcher (coloured dots, top right) switching between a | variety of common editor themes is a nice touch. | divbzero wrote: | Is this part about terminals actually true? Or a tad exaggerated | for marketing? | | > _MonoLisa uses open forms and terminals (starting and ending | points) that are pointing towards the neighboring letters to let | the eye follow the line of text fluently._ | | Regardless, I like the font overall. My go-to is Fira Code but | this might be worth a try. | deathanatos wrote: | I'm still not getting how the top of the a isn't pointing to | the left, completely opposite the arrow they've drawn on it. | | (Or, also, that anything like what the site describes actually | happens. The entire page is [citation needed].) | vinkelhake wrote: | If you're willing to spend money on a font for coding, then do | yourself a favor and take a look at PragmataPro as well. I bought | a license (checks notes...) 8 years ago and it has served me very | well. | | If I was _not_ down to pay for a font, then I 'd probably use one | of Iosevka's forms. Personally, however, it became clear to me | that just like my monitor, the font I spend hours looking at | every day is also worth some money. | | https://fsd.it/shop/fonts/pragmatapro/ | makepanic wrote: | There's also Iosevka[1] which is open source[2] and also | similar to Pragmata. | | It even has a Pragmata Pro Style. | | [1] - https://typeof.net/Iosevka/ | | [2] - https://github.com/be5invis/Iosevka | huhtenberg wrote: | Pragmata Pro is quite nice... but not for coding. | | I like narrow fonts. Barlow is excellent. News Gothic is | fantastic. Geo Grotesque is super beautiful. But it just | doesn't work for me when a _coding_ font is narrow. Fonts like | Iosevka and Pragmata are harder to read than needed and for no | clear benefit. Especially when used for projects based on C and | derivatives. If you ever find yourself needing to cram more | symbols per line onto your screen, it 's a sign that there's a | coding style problem! Lines simply should be short enough to | not require horizontal compression. | | Obviously, YMMV, to each their own, etc. | lobstrosity420 wrote: | I keep my code below the 80 column mark, as is common. For | me, the reason I like the more narrow Iosevka is because it | lets me have more split buffers open on the same monitor. | With Iosevka I can have 3 splits with a little over 80 | columns each, other fonts only let me have two. I never | noticed a decrease in readability but I've been using Iosevka | for a very long time now, perhaps it's time to try out a | wider font and see if it's worth it. | lrei wrote: | Exactly the same reason why I use Iosevka and 79chars. | However I use WQHD monitors and fit 4-5 splits. | electroly wrote: | Different strokes, I suppose. (Pun intended.) | | I like the narrower font so I can fit two side-by-side files | with full 120 character width each on a regular 16:9 display. | Iosevka is likely my forever font. I find it both beautiful | and fit for purpose; I couldn't ask for more. | | Re: "lines should be short." I prefer my code font to work | even for bad code. It's not always _my_ code that I 'm | looking at! | jrockway wrote: | Iosevka is my all-time favorite font. MonoLisa seems to sell | itself on being "wide", and Iosevka is the opposite of that. | Each letter is exactly .5em, which is on the very narrow side | of things as monospaced fonts go. So if this thing appeals to | you, Iosevka isn't the free alternative you're looking for. But | if you want the nicest monospaced font in the world, then | Iosevka is ;) | rubyist5eva wrote: | Iosevka also has an "extended" variant you can use, and you | can create a custom build that has the width you want. | jrockway wrote: | I missed that. The website lets you compare it to IBM Plex | and Fira Code as well. Same width, but a little bit more | contrast. Compares very favorably if you want wide. | | My takeaway is that monospaced fonts are basically a solved | problem thanks to Iosevka. It does everything. And you can | mix and match individual glyphs to your exact preferences! | bitwize wrote: | Another day, another Letter Gothic lookalike "developer font". I | do not feel particularly motivated to switch away from the | terminal bitmap fonts I normally use. There's something about an | 8x8, 8x16, or similar small numbers grid of pixels -- the | constraints seemed to breed creativity that you don't see too | much of anymore in monospaced fonts for coding/terminal use. | enricozb wrote: | Curious which bitmap font you use? I use terminus. | bitwize wrote: | Terminus is a great one, but right now I'm partial to the | Atari ST 8x16 font. | azeirah wrote: | My favorite font still remains fantasque sans mono. It's loosely | based on comic sans, I just need a little playful edge in my | coding job. Otherwise it gets too stale. | | Love the font | triaste wrote: | I Completely agree! It is my daily driver font. Use it | everywhere, great for shells too. And it's free | | https://github.com/belluzj/fantasque-sans | roughly wrote: | > As software developers, we always strive for better tools but | rarely consider font as such. | | ... where have YOU been spending time? | andjd wrote: | I'm going to hop on my hobby horse again for a second: | | One of their first points is this: | | >Designing a monospace font is much harder than a traditional, | proportional one: being constrained by the same width of all | glyphs can result in a boring or unreadable font. | | And they're absolutely right. But it begs the first-principals | question-- why code using a monospace font? Today, every major | editor that isn't terminal-based supports proportional width | fonts beautifully. It's also incredibly rare to see modern style | guides that depend on having consistent column widths. In 2022, | there's no technical reason to code using monospaced fonts. And | there are a ton of beautiful and readable fonts out there -- | There are probably a dozen pre-installed on your system that are | more beautiful and readable than this font. | | You see this tag line time-and-time again. "A font designed by | and for software developers." But font design is and art and a | discipline. Doing it well is very hard. | moonchrome wrote: | Proportional fonts break code navigation, moving vertically is | much more important in code than normal text. Also it's harder | to line things up, and alignment is a good cue when scanning | code. | taeric wrote: | Is it, though? Important, that is. Can be convenient. But so | is ace jump. And the latter still works. | toomanydoubts wrote: | I had never considered using variable width fonts for | programming. I can see some minor issues, like vim users(on an | environment that support variable-width fonts) now have no | consistency on where their cursor will land when using j/k to | move up and down lines, but I think I will still try it out. | chipotle_coyote wrote: | > And they're absolutely right. But it begs the first- | principals question-- why code using a monospace font? Today, | every major editor that isn't terminal-based supports | proportional width fonts beautifully. | | There was a whole "coding font" family designed around the idea | that we should be using proportional fonts for this, and it | makes a great case... | | https://input.djr.com/info/ | | ...except that just about every time I've tried this, I've | quickly run into places where trying to use a proportional font | creates visual fails. Here's a simple one: | /** * Render a given template * * | @param string $_template * @param array $_args | * @return string */ | | Put that in a non-proportional font, and the asterisks on the | first line probably won't line up with the rest. Now think of | someone doing visual alignment of assignment operators in a | block of code like you often see in Ruby, or any code following | the indentation standard where you line up parameters in a | multi-line function header with the character after the open | parenthesis like you often see in Python. Speaking of | parentheses, can you imagine what will happen with proportional | fonts and Lisp indentation? It'd drive the hardiest Emacs user | to drink in short order. | | Proportional fonts in editors are a good idea whose time | probably just hasn't yet come. We'd need (a) to have editors | that support "elastic" or variable tabs to keep things aligned | in a truly sane fashion, (b) to re-teach a generation or two of | programmers that indenting with the tab character is good, | actually, and (c) to develop a few new conventions for what | makes code look neat and pretty. | munch117 wrote: | You may be right on the main point, but I have a quarrel with | one of your arguments. | | > Put that in a non-proportional font, and the asterisks on | the first line probably won't line up with the rest. | | So lose the redundant asterisks. They serve no purpose. They | make the comment both harder to read and harder to write. | memco wrote: | Textmate 2 had some support for proportional width and | different heights and styles in its early days. Don't know | how it panned out since I've since stopped using it. | taeric wrote: | I do find it hilarious that using tabs with non static tab | stops basically solved this problem. Anyone that ever typed, | on a typewriter, almost certainly used controlled tabs to | line up data. I recall tables were easily done by just seeing | the tabs correctly then proceeding in standard way. | | That said, I don't see my lisp coffee caring that much. Let | expressions benefit from lining up. Most other code, though? | Not sure it matters that much. | kazinator wrote: | Should we have some tab-stop ruler comment convention that | the editor will follow from that line until it is changed | by another such ruler? ;; | ^-------^---^-----^----------^ (foo (bar | (x y z))) | | :) | thiht wrote: | > why code using a monospace font? | | Because unlike prose, we don't reason about code in terms of | words, sentences or paragraphs but rather in terms of | statements, lines and blocks. Navigating between visual lines | vertically makes sense when navigating in code. And to optimize | this kind of navigation, monospace fonts are the best choice | because where your cursor lands is predictible. It also brings | cool features such as block selection which you can't implement | properly with proportional fonts. | sergiotapia wrote: | I never even considered people bought fonts for local dev use. | Sounds pretty steep. | zestyping wrote: | Please stop it with the "coding ligatures" already. They are not | helpful and only serve to obscure the code being written. | | This has got to be one of my least favourite trends in | programming aesthetics these days. For a font claiming to "follow | function" to devote so much effort to sacrificing function for | the _vogue du jour_ is especially rich. | kbd wrote: | <opinion>They are not helpful and only serve to | obscure...</opinion> | | Personally -- after originally thinking like you -- I really | enjoy ligatures in my code. I disable them for my terminal | though. | | The same font can work both with and without ligatures, so it's | not a negative if a font supports them. You can choose whether | to enable them. | stormking wrote: | I don't understand how they can advertise this font being "wider" | than other ones. I skipped all those modern Programming Fonts | because none of them is as condensed and readable as "TheSans | Mono Condensed". | | That font is terrible because its basically still ASCII only, but | I use it everywhere. I would pay good money for a Unicode | version. | bussierem wrote: | The comparison to Fira Code is hilarious, basically no deviation | except 'r'. Just go use Fira Code it's at least free | andrewl-hn wrote: | I looked at it a few years ago and dismissed it because it's so | similar to Source Code Pro in terms of spacing, size and overall | feel. Source Code Pro is an excellent wide font that I've been | using since its release about a decade ago. And it's free, and | there are Nerd Font variants with ligatures if you're into that. | | I noticed that MonaLisa added script variant last year, so if you | want something like that in your editor it's a very good choice. | In fact, I'd recommend it over Operator Mono (the OG monospaced | font with scripted italics), because the later has a much smaller | character set. | | Or, pick a free Victor Mono if you like narrower symbols. Alas, | us - wide font users - have to pay for a script italics :) | ashton314 wrote: | > As software developers, we always strive for better tools but | rarely consider font as such. | | Meanwhile, I look at new coding fonts on at least a monthly | basis. Nothing beats Input Mono [^1] for me; I actually like | wider fonts, so I might take this one out for a spin. | | [^1]: https://input.djr.com/ | speedgoose wrote: | Since we are talking about our favourite coding fonts, my | personal choice is on Comic Code. I find it very easy to read and | better than the other mono comic sans fonts. | | https://tosche.net/fonts/comic-code | sebastianconcpt wrote: | Oh god... I can't say if you're trolling or not. | StevePerkins wrote: | I honestly can't tell much difference between this, and the | new "Cascadia Code" font that Microsoft recently put out. If | they didn't put "Comic" in the name, then no one would likely | think twice about it. On the other hand, the notoriety of | that name probably helps them draw attention, too. | CharlesW wrote: | There might be something to it. | | _To wit, Comic Sans is recommended by the British Dyslexia | Association and the Dyslexia Association of Ireland. An | American Institute of Graphic Arts post from last summer said | that it might be the best font for dyslexics, given its | "character disambiguation" and "variation in letter heights". | While other fonts have been specifically designed to be read | by people with dyslexia -- Dyslexie and OpenDyslexic are two | -- they just don't have the availability of Comic Sans. To | hate on Comic Sans is "ableist", Hudgins argues, and doing so | discounts the reading difficulties of millions of people._ | | https://www.thecut.com/2020/08/the-reason-comic-sans-is-a- | pu... | speedgoose wrote: | I'm really using this font everyday since about two years. I | remember setting the font in vscode and testing comic sans ms | for fun, just to see. To my surprise it wasn't that bad for | me but of course not monospaced. So I looked at monospaced | fonts inspired by comic sans ms, you have a few free ones on | GitHub, and I ended up with comic code relatively quick. | [deleted] | nerdponx wrote: | This is great. I already tend to go for "curly" fonts like | this: Recursive Mono ("Casual" or "Duotone" presets), Fantasque | Sans Mono, and Mononoki. | | MonoLisa seems to fall into a similar category. Is there a name | for this style? | kbd wrote: | Highly recommend Fantasque Sans Mono for a realistic take on | the "comic-style" coding font - | https://github.com/belluzj/fantasque-sans | timfi wrote: | This may seem like a minor nitpick but it's something that popped | out at me: italisizing a font shouldn't add or remove serifs. | There is a reason why Unicode defines both sans- and serif | versions of italics. | michaklang wrote: | Holy macaroni! Looks awesome! | shmerl wrote: | It tired a bunch of different fonts, but nothing felt as good as | Dejavu Sans Mono. | flobosg wrote: | The whitespace only ligatures look like an interesting idea and a | good alternative to full ones. | diputsmonro wrote: | I feel like I'm the only person who hates ligatures in coding | fonts, but I agree that these whitespace ligatures are (mostly) | a good compromise. | StevePerkins wrote: | I wonder how many people glancing at the landing page have | browsed over to the download page, and discovered that this a | paid font? To the tune of $69 to $239, depending on the options | you want. | | If this were something really revolutionary, then okay. But this | looks like every other Bitstream Vera Sans Mono variant, just | tweaked to be a touch wider than Fira Code or Jetbrains Mono. But | half of the fonts on https://www.programmingfonts.org are | Bitstream Vera Sans Mono variants, a touch wider than Fira Code | or Jetbrains Mono. And they're all open source and free. | [deleted] | [deleted] | moffkalast wrote: | People charging $199 for a slightly wider Lucida Console, you | can't make this shit up. The marketing is so outrageous. | | In case someone's seriously considering this, here are an | additional two sites that have literally hundreds of CC0 and | other free to use fonts, not just monospace: | | https://www.1001freefonts.com | | http://allfont.net | | DIN 1451 Mittelschrift is my personal favorite. | monkeycantype wrote: | I wanted to let you know I'm upvoting you, not for the useful | links you have provided, but because I also love DIN, to an | unreasonable degree, like the kind of feeling that makes | someone otherwise totally rational marry a pokemon. | | When I was about 20, after the Berlin wall came down, I rode | my bike round berlin, then all round east then west Germany | for three months, sleeping rough in the forest most of the | time, and I think the font, on road signs everywhere, soaked | into me as linked to that summer. | | But you know what really creeps me about this font. It has a | history dating back to the start of the 20th century as | letterforms for hand painted signs, but Deutsche | Industrienorm 1451 was created in 1936, the year of the of | the Berlin Olympics, concentration camps had been open for | three years, Triumph of the Will was released the year | before. If you've never seen 'Triumph of the Will' it's an | experience, I'd never understood how the fascists had managed | to appeal to enough people to actually win an election, but | in that film you see how they presented themselves to the | people of Germany at the time and it was sophisticated. | There's a moment in the film in which hilter interacts with | an unemployed labourer, and in that interaction he imbues | this guy with a sense of purpose, hitler has told him he is a | soldier - a soldier with a shovel, it's nonsense, but it is | carefully crafted nonsense. It seems to me that DIN is part | of this carefully crafted propaganda, a tool to help project | an vision of Nazi Germany as rational, orderly, scientific, | rigorous and correct. And it does the job, like the | unemployed labourer, I respond to it exactly the way goebbels | would want me to. | | I know I can use a Roman road without endorsing the invasion | of Gaul, but there's still a horror there millennia later. | CRConrad wrote: | > There's a moment in the film in which hilter interacts | with an unemployed labourer, and in that interaction he | imbues this guy with a sense of purpose, hitler has told | him he is a soldier - a soldier with a shovel, it's | nonsense, but it is carefully crafted nonsense. | | Well, maybe not _total_ nonsense? The same kind of thing | seems to have worked elsewhere too: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_Progress_Administration | drewzero1 wrote: | I love the DIN family but haven't been able to find a | monospaced variant for coding/terminal use. I'd add Abstract | Fonts[1] to the list, though you have to watch the license | (many are only free for personal/non-commercial use). | | [1] https://www.abstractfonts.com/ | thor_molecules wrote: | If you like symbols and fancy terminal stuff, I'd also like | to recommend any of the Nerd Fonts - all free. | | https://www.nerdfonts.com/ | john_alan wrote: | Superb. Love this font. | zestyping wrote: | Oof. Yeah, I do love the squared capital D in the DIN family, | but the "ft" in Mittelschrift is a car crash. | notum wrote: | It looks like a lovely font, a shame about the price. They | have, however, included it into their website and distributed | it to my browser for free, without asking me first: | https://www.monolisa.dev/api/fonts/initial | | According to the EULA the font is now mine under the term "by | downloading the software accompanying this license". | | Correct me if I'm wrong please. /s | vmception wrote: | _yoink!_ | | I saved the EULA in case your interpretation is accurate and | the EULA changes. | turtlebits wrote: | IMO, this is one of the rare programming fonts that actually | looks great to me. I use Operator which is also a paid font. I | used Source Code Pro for a short while and never really like | any of the other free offerings. | IgorPartola wrote: | Also, how many people who regularly browse HN have seen a | headline like "[Font Name] - A font designed for developers"? | As a mild font nerd, I love that people keep making more fonts. | But also: | | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... | kevwil wrote: | - While the effort to create fonts is not trivial and should be | rewarded, this seems expensive. I've bought fonts before, but | they were like $5-15, not $100. - It's fantastic to see the | variety of human experience on display in the wide variety of | font preferences. I used to thing "why to we need more than one?" | LOL - My favorite so far is Source Code Pro. | lanewinfield wrote: | I'm a big fan of Input Sans as well: https://djr.com/input/ | lifeplusplus wrote: | I will never use a font like this wider? hieroglyphs?? LOL no ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-02-14 23:00 UTC)