Join the conversation

Sign in to join this conversation, and others like it, in the communities you care about.

Dank Mono

Dank Mono is a coding font designed for aesthetes with Retina displays in mind. This is a place to provide feedback and track its progress!

Dank Mono / General

Add more ligatures

Add more ligatures

Dank Mono / GeneralMay 8, 2018 · 9:27pm · (Edited 3 months ago)
This is an umbrella task for ligatures that have been requested. If not otherwise noted, the ligatures are planned to be implemented, some might be "under consideration", which means they might not be added.

Released Ligatures


  • =>
  • ==
  • !=
  • ===
  • !==
  • [|
  • |]
  • {|
  • |}
  • ++
  • |>

Next Release


  • /*
  • */
  • ->
  • <-
  • .=

Future


  • //
  • ####, ###, ##
  • </, />

Operators like `>=` and `<=` might not be added as ligatures for them involve symbols that "break" the visual similarity to their actual composition.

May 8, 2018 · 9:55pm

i notice that /> and </ are not on this thread but were in the original issue. are those no longer being considered?

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

Oops, sorry, I might've accidentally removed them

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

edited :) cheers for letting me know

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

Not sure how feasible or desirable it is, but I was thinking about a solution for providing some of the more "controversial" ligatures (<= and >= ). What about a font generator? On the website people would be able to pick whichever ligatures they prefer and leave out the ones they don't want.

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

I don't know how feasible this is from a technical perspective, or if it is even a solution to the problem, but I thought it was an interesting idea nonetheless.

  • reply
  • like

I don't know how feasible this is from a technical perspective, or if it is even a solution to the problem, but I thought it was an interesting idea nonetheless.

Hm, i‘d like to avoid variations like that if possible. Currently I’m thinking of making an opentype feature like “mlig“ maybe 🤔

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

May 10, 2018 · 9:55pm

You have an exiting ligature for `|>` is it possible to consider adding the inverse `<|`

like-fill
2
  • reply
  • like

May 13, 2018 · 6:13pm

You have an exiting ligature for `|>` is it possible to consider adding the inverse `<|`

Of course! Consider it done ✅

  • reply
  • like

The ones under "Next Release" are now out in 0.490 https://spectrum.chat/dank-mono?thread=f76e010c-f57f-44e3-87f1-8787f2ca9e27

  • reply
  • like

May 14, 2018 · 7:09am

Of course! Consider it done ✅

Thanks for such a rapid response. Can you confirm if the plan was to add the <| ligature to version 0.490 or simply to add it to the roadmap? I can't see it within the latest release.

  • reply
  • like

Thanks for such a rapid response. Can you confirm if the plan was to add the <| ligature to version 0.490 or simply to add it to the roadmap? I can't see it within the latest release.

It’ll be added to the next patch :)

  • reply
  • like

It’ll be added to the next patch :)

Here you go :) https://spectrum.chat/dank-mono?thread=c7e2fbd6-4bf9-4c93-9d35-24c35431cda1

  • reply
  • like

May 29, 2018 · 9:56am

What about <-> ligature or maybe it makes sense to disable <- ligature if <-> is written?

  • reply
  • like
  • reply
  • like

May 30, 2018 · 4:05am

Once I add <-> and <=> this will be solved :)

  • reply
  • like

which shouldn't take me too long

  • reply
  • like

You're amazing Phil!

  • reply
  • like

You're amazing Phil!

Don't thank me too early :P but I'll try my best to get it done this weekend

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

June 1, 2018 · 6:54am

I have been using DankMono with Elm for some time now. There is one ligature missing for me:

<|

like-fill
2
  • reply
  • like

June 5, 2018 · 5:51pm

If you are doing </ and />, </> (close react fragment) would also be nice

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

June 6, 2018 · 3:16pm

If you are doing </ and />, </> (close react fragment) would also be nice

I might actually not add those. I've tried out a couple of variations for them based on the idea that ligatures shouldn't diverge too much from the original, individual glyphs

  • reply
  • like

it turns out that with the width of the glyphs in Dank the xml/html/jsx syntax is not that suitable for ligatures

  • reply
  • like

at least not the ones that I've come up with so far or have seen before

  • reply
  • like

June 7, 2018 · 4:08pm

Other ligatures that'd be really nice to have: /=, ..., ->> and <<- and potentially >> and << and <|>. Also, if it's up for consideration, even if it breaks visual similarity, I would love to see <= and >= implemented, I find they make code so much nicer to look at. Otherwise, stellar job!

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

Also <> and ;;/;;; to match ::/:::.

(Oh, and I realized that if ligatures are properly rendered, <|> sort of works. There is a little bit of misalignment, but the ligature still looks right).

  • reply
  • like

June 9, 2018 · 4:04pm

I ran into := the other day, and realized it would be great to have one for that (which also goes well with .=).

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

The next release will definitely have <> , <|> , <!-- , --> , and ... which I've worked on today :)

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

Oh, and also /=

  • reply
  • like

Oh yea, := might be great for Golang :)

  • reply
  • like

Seems there ligatures for --? For e.g. integer--;

  • reply
  • like

Seems there ligatures for --? For e.g. integer--;

Sorry, probably won't add a ligature for --. Since the spacing is already right there's no sensible combination of two strokes ;)

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

June 28, 2018 · 11:13am

Hi, I am not really deep into any "ligatures controversies", but what I understand is, that you do not want to add ligatures for <= and >=, because the ligature would visually differ too much from its composition, so what one has to type in order to achieve the sign.But how does the !== ligature not differ that much from is composition? In my honest opinion the <= and >= ligature would be much closer to their composition.

like-fill
2
  • reply
  • like

+1 for this. Please add <= and >=

like-fill
3
  • reply
  • like

June 29, 2018 · 6:45pm

Keep up the great work! This is my vote for ->> and ~@ ligatures

  • reply
  • like

June 30, 2018 · 6:47pm

Hi, can you please consider adding a ligature for `:=` ? thanks

  • reply
  • like

July 19, 2018 · 8:41pm

Ooo, I would like to add a request for a && and || ligatures! As well as a +1 for >= and <= ligatures. But even if you don't get to them, I looove this font! I waffled over getting it for a couple weeks, but I'm really glad I gave in :)

  • reply
  • like

July 30, 2018 · 10:49am

I'd like to have <| too :) I'm also asking myself, if I'm able to update, because the 491 mac fix broke ligatures for my terminal (terminator, ubuntu).

like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like

I'd like to have <| too :) I'm also asking myself, if I'm able to update, because the 491 mac fix broke ligatures for my terminal (terminator, ubuntu).

The new ligatures in latest are using calt and replace some stuff with empty glyphs. Can you open a new thread with some screenshots please? :) I’m looking for some of these edgecases

  • reply
  • like

July 30, 2018 · 9:49pm

The new ligatures in latest are using calt and replace some stuff with empty glyphs. Can you open a new thread with some screenshots please? :) I’m looking for some of these edgecases

I opened this issue before. https://spectrum.chat/thread/1d030a96-f53f-4f2b-a642-ffeabdeb0bd4

  • reply
  • like

August 12, 2018 · 9:21pm

<!-- how about html comment -->

  • reply
  • like
Your message here...

*bold*_italic_`code````codeblock```