I’m not sure why “monospaced coding fonts with language-specific ligatures” became a fad, e.g., turning “=>” into “⇒”. It’s clever, but it strikes me as the epitome of “solution in search of a problem.”

@chipotle Picking Typefaces by Frank Chimero shows me I can't tell the difference between typefaces.

@chipotle I actually just recently started using Dank Mono which uses ligatures and am really enjoying it!

I would argue they don't fall into the “solution in search of a problem” camp. The solution here is a way to display an arrow (already solved by =>). Ligatures are a bit of surprise/delight on top of the existing solution. An improvement to UX (for those who enjoy them) as opposed to an entirely new solution.

Still, I can see how they could appear as a little frivolous to some.

@chipotle I like this in Fira Code because it makes it really easy to tell I'm using the right symbols, like JS === instead of shitty ==

@geewiz @kusters I can buy the "delight" argument. It just doesn't seem to me like the ligatures are any more legible than the separate characters they're replacing, and in some cases are a little less so.

@mdhughes I know some folks definitely like them! But if I can't tell at a glance that "==" is two equals signs and "===" is three, I think "use a font that makes those very distinct characters that don't run into one another," not "use a font that makes them into new zazzy ligatures." :)