Hot take: Could font designers please just agree that the only valid way to write 0 for technical fonts is with a dot in the middle? 0-with-nothing is irritatingly ambiguous with O, 0-with-a-slash is irritatingly ambiguous with Ø, and I’ve never seen the 0-with-broken-edges actually used outsize of Brazilian license plates.
I’m at the sad and tired point in my life where I don’t want things where every nuance is customizable, I want things where the defaults are pretty good. :P
Never seen it before in practice! I suppose I have no objective complaints. I might worry a little about dyslexic legibility, but no practical experience with it.
Yeah, I agree. my eyes are pretty bad, and I struggle to read code at even 14pt sometimes. I pretty much exclusively use Source Code Pro as my main programming font because it has the most distinctly different letters and the dot-in-the-middle 0 and NO LIGATURES.
I am seriously impressed by the quality of this font. Very regular, very readable; I would put it at the same level as PragmataPro for coding.
Vertical alignment is correct for arrows (<, -, >, =…). It is possible to choose among multiple styles of zero characters. I have not seen any line height issues in Emacs and in XTerm.
Unicode coverage could be better, but this typeface is brand new, so I guess it will improve.
Honestly, you may want to try Input. You can modify it a bit to suit your tastes. I use it simply because it seems to make it very easy to distinguish between curly braces, brackets, and parentheses at very small font sizes, at least better than any others I’ve seen. there’s free licenses in addition to commercial ones so I don’t feel much guilt plugging it.
It looks interesting, but I wish the page showed some code at a point size more similar to what developers usually use rather than these huge samples. They might do a good job at letting type designers appreciate the details, but I just don’t get a feeling for how it would look in my editor.
It looks good, but it’s a commercial product. This is not the place :-)
Hot take: Could font designers please just agree that the only valid way to write 0 for technical fonts is with a dot in the middle? 0-with-nothing is irritatingly ambiguous with O, 0-with-a-slash is irritatingly ambiguous with Ø, and I’ve never seen the 0-with-broken-edges actually used outsize of Brazilian license plates.
Just pulled some statistics from what people download: https://neil.computer/notes/berkeley-mono-font-variant-popularity/
The dotted-zero is indeed the most popular.
I love slashed zeroes!
I’ve never used Ø or had to.
What a strange coincidence.
An Ø bit my sister once.
Ø bites cån be very painful!
Yes but it’s not common for islands to bite.
Maybe not anymore…
Nah, I like my slashed zeros. You just need properly distinguishable characters. Many font designers get it wrong.
Or just let you choose. There were a few things about those fonts that bothered me initially, but with customisation they became my favourites.
I’m at the sad and tired point in my life where I don’t want things where every nuance is customizable, I want things where the defaults are pretty good. :P
What is your opinion on writing a 0 with a backslash, like in Atkinson Hyperlegible?
Never seen it before in practice! I suppose I have no objective complaints. I might worry a little about dyslexic legibility, but no practical experience with it.
Yeah, I agree. my eyes are pretty bad, and I struggle to read code at even 14pt sometimes. I pretty much exclusively use Source Code Pro as my main programming font because it has the most distinctly different letters and the dot-in-the-middle 0 and NO LIGATURES.
I am seriously impressed by the quality of this font. Very regular, very readable; I would put it at the same level as PragmataPro for coding.
Vertical alignment is correct for arrows (<, -, >, =…). It is possible to choose among multiple styles of zero characters. I have not seen any line height issues in Emacs and in XTerm.
Unicode coverage could be better, but this typeface is brand new, so I guess it will improve.
Thanks for the kind words, this is how it looks on iTerm: Berkeley Mono iTerm screenshot.
I will get better over time with new glyphs and features. We’re planning for a condensed version next.
Honestly, you may want to try Input. You can modify it a bit to suit your tastes. I use it simply because it seems to make it very easy to distinguish between curly braces, brackets, and parentheses at very small font sizes, at least better than any others I’ve seen. there’s free licenses in addition to commercial ones so I don’t feel much guilt plugging it.
Love it.
https://input.djr.com/preview/?size=17&language=clike&theme=default&family=InputSans&width=200&weight=200&line-height=0.9&a=0&g=0&i=serif&l=serifs_round&zero=slash&asterisk=0&braces=0&preset=default&customize=please
The content of that box drawing section of this font specimen had me grinning though.
The pairing with Univers was also pretty tight. Paid or not, it looks pretty good (and +1 no ligatures).
That is the fastest italic I’ve ever seen, especially the all-caps sample.
Beautiful. Seems similar to Apple’s SF Mono.
It looks interesting, but I wish the page showed some code at a point size more similar to what developers usually use rather than these huge samples. They might do a good job at letting type designers appreciate the details, but I just don’t get a feeling for how it would look in my editor.
Yawn another sans-serif.
Sure, Go Mono is the one true serif monospaced typeface, but it would be nice to see some competition.
I’ve used and liked Verily Serif Mono as well
The Triplicate font by Matthew Butterick is both monospace and a true serif.
JetBrains Mono NL is an excellent alternative.