prototype for operator proposal for review

David Herman dherman at mozilla.com
Wed May 18 16:20:53 PDT 2011


It's okay in Courier New but not in lots of other popular monospaced fonts. See attached image.

Dave

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screen shot 2011-05-18 at 4.19.01 PM.png
Type: image/png
Size: 24018 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20110518/5f2a0677/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------


On May 18, 2011, at 3:30 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:

> 
> On May 18, 2011, at 3:14 PM, David Herman wrote:
> 
>>> I think I like <: about as much as  <|.  I'm not sure which is going to be more readable across a variety of fonts and sizes.  <| does seem to be generally more visually distinct.
>> 
>> I just have to say that the pipe symbol in many fonts makes for a really hideous triangle. It doesn't line up at all with the top and bottom of the less-than/greater-than symbols.
>> 
>>> I suspect that to most JS programmers the UML open triangle generalization arrow head is at least as relevant a precedent as any type theory uses.  In other words,the relevancy of either isn't very high.
>> 
>> Yeah. In fact, the analogy to type theory would have us read the <: symbol as a binary predicate, which isn't what's going on here at all.
>> 
>> So... I don't find either of these lexemes very pleasant, but I don't have any beautiful alternatives to offer.
>> 
>> Dave
>> 
> 
> It's highly variable, but on average they both generally look better in a mono-spaced fonts. 
> 



More information about the es-discuss mailing list