Digraphs *and* Unicode pretty-glyphs, for arrows, triangle, etc.

Bill Frantz frantz at pwpconsult.com
Thu Apr 5 10:33:46 PDT 2012

On 4/4/12 at 23:54, ecmascript at norbertlindenberg.com (Norbert 
Lindenberg) wrote:

>Besides typing, legibility is critical: ⇒, ≥, ≤ are 
>clearly improvements over their ASCII counterparts, but ≠ and 
>≢ are too hard to tell apart.

One thing that concerns me with using the extended Unicode set 
is that I will need to shift to a larger font size to make out 
the extended characters. I don't know whether that will result 
in more or less of the program text in a fixed size window, but 
if it is less, then having those characters in the source will 
not improve program readability.

Cheers - Bill

Bill Frantz        |"After all, if the conventional wisdom was 
working, the
408-356-8506       | rate of systems being compromised would be 
going down,
www.periwinkle.com | wouldn't it?" -- Marcus Ranum

More information about the es-discuss mailing list