Ligatures in programming fonts:
hell no https://practicaltypography.com/ligatures-in-programming-fonts-hell-no.html
@veer66 I took a couple of courses around typography in college and I agree with his statements about false positives and ambiguity. What people actually want is Unicode support in their languages and an understanding of how to import them.
เช่น: ⇒ using Vim (& Neovim) digraphs is `<C-k>=>`; λ is `<C-k>l*`; etc.
@veer66 For this reason I've switched to a terminal-based mail client as I prefer typing everything in Neovim now — especially with Goyo + Pencil + Limelight
@veer66 Also I wouldn't be surprised if in the future Conceal plus treesitter would allow better, semantic visual replacement of characters solving one of article author's gripes about false positives if you want the LOOK of Unicode in your editor, but need ASCII on the output end.
@veer66 Languages that have decent Unicode support in one way or another: PureScript, Haskell, Dhall, Julia
@veer66 Haskell strings are notoriously bad, like Erlang ... PureScript modernizes a lot of "issues" of Haskell, but doesn't have near the community size and package support (yet)
@veer66 in my $XDG_CONFIG_HOME/nvim/init.vim I added some extras
" commonly used in Dhall, PureScript, & Haskell
digraph ~> 8605 " ↝
digraph O+ 10753 " ⨁
digraph ^^ 10835 " ⩓
digraph // 11005 " ⫽
@veer66 I tend to find it pleasant. It's direct and unambiguous. You can use to match the math-y symbols of a paper so the two are easier to follow.
@veer66 Now if only there was Thai and Lao support... it's a shame abugidas & abjads don't play well with monospaced fonts
@toastal I'm rare because my programming is for processing Thai text. 🙄