Adobe releases open-source coding typeface


20 Responses to “Adobe releases open-source coding typeface”

  1. theophrastvs says:

    this looks like a proper boon to those of us sitting between Fortran (yep, really) and more.. modern implementations.  but(!) how’s the visibility shift from a period to a comma?  .,,., ?  (and forward tick and backward tick for the win  ‘ `”’”`’ ‘)

  2. FourFeetOfCurl says:

    Here’s a sample.

    It’s a shame there’s no italic.

  3. wryfi says:

    I prefer Ubuntu Sans Mono, personally. This font is too wide for my taste.

  4. nixiebunny says:

    I’ve only been waiting 25 years for this font, ever since I switched from a video terminal to a Mac.

    Why isn’t a useful programming font standard on all computers? 

    And why does Windows use a proportional font with such a narrow i in its filename windows that I can’t reliably click on the correct character?

    • alxr says:

      Most Linux distributions come with Vera Sans Mono/DejaVu Sans Mono, which I think is an excellent coding font. OS X has Menlo, which is a slightly-tweaked version of the same. And Windows has come with Consolas, which is similarly excellent and has a wonderful true italic, since Vista. So there are some inbuilt options that aren’t Courier New, thankfully :)

  5. atteSmythe says:

    I’m currently using the Dina Programming Font, but I’ll happily give this a try. Thanks!

  6. Oskar says:

    Nope, I’m not convinced. It might be that since switching from terminals, I’ve simply gotten used to Courier/Courier New, and can’t imagine coding in anything else, but I don’t think so. Here is how some of my code usually looks (in Notepad++):

    Here’s how it looks with the new font:

    It’s certainly prettier, but I don’t care about pretty. The code is much less legible to me (though to be fair, I picked a particularly illegible and rough piece of code). 

    • scav says:

      I guess it’s a matter of personal preference or the fact that if you have been reading code in Courier for decades, you are so used to it that it is easier for you to read for that reason alone. Much as it is easier for me to type on a qwerty keyboard, however little sense its layout actually makes.

      I think the new font is slightly more *legible* than Courier in the example you give. I don’t think it’s going to be the main factor in code *readability* for sure.

  7. That does actually look really useful. It’s crazy how much difference a more readable font makes, especially when you need to differentiate between different characters.

  8. Pope Ratzo says:

    Very nice.  Don’t care for the “i” though.

  9. Peter Wood says:

    Our naming convention is fine… if you have the right font installed.

  10. Florian Bösch says:

    How’s it compare to proggy, or any of these?

    • noky says:

      As someone who writes code all day, I’m always on the lookout for a font that is easy on the eye. Came across that same article recently (great roundup, BTW) and tried them all out for myself. Inconsolata was by far my favorite. Tried Adobe’s new Source Code Pro this morning, Inconsolata is still the hands-down winner in my book. The Adobe font simply looks too squished.

  11. scav says:

    The zero reminds me a little of the proofreading font that is used by project gutenberg, only not hideously ugly.  (NB the hideous ugliness of DPCustomMono is actually a reasonable design feature to make mis-reading individual characters less likely even as part of a common word you might otherwise skim over. But you wouldn’t want to make it your default font for emacs I don’t think.)

    The Adobe one can get away with being quite pretty because compilers are better proofreaders than humans.

  12. Petzl says:

     Anyone else getting an IBM Selectric vibe?

  13. Quibbler says:

    Like many others I use courier for coding. Fonts that easily allows the distinction between l and 1 , 0 and O are essential.

    Why has times new roman become standard for scientific journals? The 1 and l are the same.

Leave a Reply