.. and ..= are looking very different

[upsuper]

It seems that currently the ligature for .. and ..= are looking very different (the dots of the latter are much bigger and in the middle vertically). Is there any reason ..= is designed that way?

This ligature looks unfortunate for Rust, because in Rust .. is exclusive range, and ..= is inclusive range, they have very similar semantics.

It would be great if ..= can look similar to ...

[tonsky]

I don’t remember where it comes from but I believe it is an operator in some language. I agree that maybe rendering it that way was not the greatest idea, along with .= and .-

[upsuper]

It might be a good idea to have a table to record where each combination is from, and what conflicting cases are. That would probably be helpful when this kind of issues are raised.

If you can dump a list of current ligatures in a wiki page with some examples, people may start filling it with usecases I believe, maybe something like:

• =<
  • less than or equal to: Erlang
  • not a syntax: docopt
• ..=
  • (unknown)
  • range inclusive: Rust

[tonsky]

There is one https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1T19dtqd5pqzmUX3epbaGwuVvPIiReCwsd_XDfVhTqW0/edit?usp=sharing

[upsuper]

Hmmm... So it was added for Rust, but it doesn't work well in Rust... That's interesting :D

[tonsky]

I can see why it doesn’t work well now though. I’ll see what I can do.

[upsuper]

Thanks!

[upsuper]

Ping on this. So actually given the spreadsheets, there isn't really a conflict. The ligature doesn't work well in the language it meant to benefit. Could you probably remove such ligature or make it align with ..?

[tonsky]

Yes I’ll remove it