Hacker News Reader

Comment by wodenokoto | Hacker News Reader

Do you have examples of where that doesn’t happen?

I found ubuntu mono to be one of the best in term of identifying those characters, with l and 1 being immediately identifiable, but O is only slightly larger than 0 so it can still be mistaken for a 0 if you are not careful (0 has a dot so it can not be mistaken with O).

I don't know of any monospace font where O can easily be identified as such and not mistaken with 0.

edit: see a sample here: https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Ubuntu+Mono?category=Monos...

Every character is easily identifiable by itself, except for O. I'm also curious if anyone has a monospace with better identifiably for O and 0.

I use andale mono it has a dot in the middle of zero. There are plenty of others that have dots and slashes. I wouldn't use a font that didn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andalé_Mono

edit: I also use monaco which has slashes in zero

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monaco_(typeface)

The point is not that 0 must be easily identifiable, but also O: If you see a O without 0 as a comparison, can you identify it as such ?

In every monospaced font I know, there is a way to identify 0 (the dot or the slash), but not O which could be easily mistaken for a 0.

Wouldn't it be the one without the dot or the slash? it's honestly never been a problem for me. What has been a problem is the difference between an oval and a circle when zero is not marked.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com