Why the fuck did vscode make bitmap fonts on linux so fucking blurry???Completely ruins the entire point of using bitmap fonts.
because ui fags literally cannot help themselves from heaping their never ending dogshit on top of functionally complete interfaces in some sort of perverted self-gratifying quest of "modernizing" everything they touch whilst burning as much cpu as possible just because the resources are there
>>108942598chromium browser is actively hostile towards bitmap fonts. the only way to keep them sharp is to have binarization svg filter applied. no idea of its impact on performance for code editor.
>>108942710this. chrome's font stack doesn't handle bitmap fonts properly. Google doesn't care about you or your usecases, only that you can properly see emojis on their kosher fonts (roboto, noto, etc.). Even their lower level skia graphics library has tons of issues supporting features that all text rendering stacks have supported since the 90's, like subpixel, sharp hinting, hinting-based aa, etc. All of these are public domain tech, you no longer have to go on your way to pay for M$ patents to have good looking text, but google only cares about phones/chomrbooks devices where these are non issues
>>108942598VSCode is a webapp bro. Why is VSCode so popular anyway?
>>108943048it just works
>>108943048only among js/ts plebs
>>108942598>bitmap fontsLMAO. What’s next, you gonna ditch cars and ride horses instead?
>>108942598>python instead of C, C++ or C#toddler mentality
>>108943048It's free and it doesn't look like total ass that's all it takes. There really are only three types of customers for editors and IDEs.>vim and emacs autists>those that somewhat care about the UI, ranging from n++ to vscode>those that are employed and just use whatever shit they are comfortable with and gets paid by their employer
>>108942598Use MS Gothic, it's not exactly a monospace bitmap font but it renders as such when you use <20 sizes(i'm not sure of the exact number)You are not alone in being pissed off at their chronic inability to use bitmap fonts, they cite chromium issues but Atom which they conveniently killed had addons where you could quickly swap between fonts esp Unifont and bitmap font could function okYou may need to install a language pack to get MS Gothic>>108944063Bitmap fonts are the only ones that can both appear sharp and pack a lot of information on screen efficiently.Vector fonts in a code editor and terminal look pathologically blurry to me, you need >4k res to get them to look good and by then i'd rather use the resolution to display more longer lines
>>108944108I've used Atom and VS Code only because they were/are the only ones with syntax highlighting that isn't garbage bin worse than useless tierI still miss Atom not for the webshit ui but because of the theming and syntax highlighting support for anything that isn't webshit java c/cpp/csTo give you an idea KDE's kate and notepad++ claim to have syntax highlighting for some languages but in practice its broken and basically unusable, i assume because it hasn't been tested with updates and it has no awareness of language rules.None of this occured on Atom/VSCode, i get somewhat proper highlighting and decent theming even on less popular languages.
>>108942598what do you mean? on linux font sharpness is not a metric, so this "blurriness" you refer to is not actually real
>>108942598see if `"workbench.fontAliasing": "none”,` works in Linux like it does in macOSt. using Departure Mono at even multiples of 11/2 on his 200% text zoom monitor
>>108942598emacs doesn't have this problem. neither does firefox btw
>>108944190try Geany
>>108944190>Atomthats a name I've not heard for a long time.
>>108944130I don't understand the desire to want to read text for antspeople break up their textlike thisfor a reason
>>108943109>only among js/ts plebsnot so fast there champ, many, me included, use Zed
>>108942598what makes you think sharpness is a metric?
