Re:Ligatures in programming fonts: hell no
by grzm on Saturday May 13, 2023 @10:52AM
(#35928961)
> if you’re preparing your code for others to read—whether on screen or on paper—skip the ligatures.
Here he's referring to code in books, slide decks, and during presentations, not for editing.
Just below the section the above quote is pulled from, Butterick explains
> One inspiration for this piece was the LaTeX crowd, who would routinely write me to insist their typography was infallible. And yet. I kept seeing LaTeX-prepared books that incorrectly substituted curly quotes for backticks.... “But code samples like these aren’t really ambiguous, because everyone knows that you don’t type the curly quotes.” ... But many of today’s programming languages (e.g., Racket) accept UTF-8 input.... So ambiguity is a real possibility. Same problem with ligatures.
Re:Ligatures in programming fonts: hell no
by nxpnsv on Saturday May 13, 2023 @01:30PM
(#35930598)
Hmm, maybe suboptimal for publishing. That said most publications i read have no code but beautifully rendered equations. I find these more efficient at getting the point across than code… but i guess mileage vary
Here he's referring to code in books, slide decks, and during presentations, not for editing.
Just below the section the above quote is pulled from, Butterick explains
> One inspiration for this piece was the LaTeX crowd, who would routinely write me to insist their typography was infallible. And yet. I kept seeing LaTeX-prepared books that incorrectly substituted curly quotes for backticks.... “But code samples like these aren’t really ambiguous, because everyone knows that you don’t type the curly quotes.” ... But many of today’s programming languages (e.g., Racket) accept UTF-8 input.... So ambiguity is a real possibility. Same problem with ligatures.