https://puu.sh/sbUti/6022c0afb0.png
Above being a random screenshot from a project laying around.
I think it's Windows only though.
The font though? I don't know about that.
I don't regret it.
Is it absolutely necessary? No. But neither is a fast computer, a comfortable chair, or a nice briefcase. But professionals will throw an extra couple hundred bucks at any of those without a second thought (or scrutiny from their peers). Why should we skimp on these tools in particular?
Are there any other "non-usual" recommendations for writing code? I remember trying Nitti [0] for a while for, that's the font iA Writer uses.
/edit: After very short usage I already found one thing the author said to be true:
> While using Operator Mono, I found that I scan entire words as I read code more easily; while in other typefaces, my parsing style is often more letter-by-letter.
Not sure why this happens either. Maybe because the font feels more condensed? Single characters almost "merge" into blocks (words). Though it also feels a little bit harder on the eyes to read single characters.
――――――
Pretty unusual, but after years I finally managed to find an alternative to Consolas I liked enough in Oxygen Mono—albeit I turned down a lot of really good fonts just because they had too much interline spacing and I couldn't tweak in Sublime.
Pretty much no Unicode support outside of common accents (good for every European language at least) and common programming symbols, though. Still I edited in em and en dashes and never found it lacking since.
Edit: Just remembered, client's assistant originally initiated the search for the expensive font by asking if we could use the same font as a high-end NYC-based clothing retailer. So, they were the ones who paid for it, and in multiple styles, too.
Real experts in font design, but trying to market to developers... probably a mistake.
You really should!
https://medium.com/@docodemore/an-alternative-to-operator-mo...
I also think it's pretty important for the cursive font not only to be monospace, but to be the same width as the non-cursive font. You'll get neither of those if you follow those instructions. In fact, I was not able to find a single free monospace cursive font.
So here's hoping that somebody gets inspired by this and makes a free alternative. I get that fonts are a ton of work to make, but I don't think I can justify spending 200 bucks on a font that only I will look at.
{I, l, 1}, {Q, O, 0}, {S, 5}, {Z, 2}...if I have to pause even for a second to find confidence, it won't be in editor. Old school MIL-STD-100 and its modern ASME Y14 equivalent were spot on when they expressly prohibited the use of some of these characters as designators in technical drawings.
>> ...using this (beautiful) script typeface for code comments has improved both the quality of tone and frequency of my code annotations — something which I highly value.
Maybe it's just me, but I find it noticeably difficult to parse the italics...suspecting it may have something to do with discontinuity between script characters.
Anyone have an idea who the target market is based on their $200 price point?
[1] http://www.typography.com/fonts/operator/characters/operator...
What I think is strange is licensing per-computer. Maybe that's normal for fonts. Seems very stingy to me that I should pay multiple times for laptop/work/home computer.
I'll give Operator Mono a try... but i absolutely love Ubuntu Mono.
You are just the worst kind of person, Kenneth.
