What font to use for source code in a document?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
4
down vote

favorite
2












I'm currently writing some text where I discuss a python script.
So naturally, there's a lot of code in the document and it seems like listings is the default way to do so.



However, unlike what I'm used to when using latex, the default looks atrocious!
default



Non-monospaced source code!? WTF? (side question: or is there really a typographic "rule" for this?)



OK, I can fix that after a quick read of the docs with ttfamily.



ttfamily version



But this is still very weird, mostly the italic part for the comments. It just looks totally off to me.



Is this because I just happen to be used to weird fonts in my editors (Monospace Regular, not too weird, I'd guess) and this is normal and typographically sound, or is there a better option?



And if so, what would that option be? I'd rather not use some random font that I, personally, like but that is objectively bad, especially in combination with my default fonts for the text (all from Komas scrbook).



Edit:*



Obviously, I can just use "random" monospaced/typewriter fonts, but my main concern is that I'll just pick one that will not work (typographically) with the default computer modern for the body of the document. So not only should the font work as a monospaced font for readable source code, it should also not look "off" next to computer modern.
So some kind of website listing font X is compatible with font Y would probably be the most useful, but I haven't found one yet.



MWE:



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python, numbers=left, numberstyle=tiny, stepnumber=1, numbersep=5pt, tabsize=4%, basicstyle=ttfamily}

begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument









share|improve this question























  • You probably want to add columns=fullflexible, keepspaces=true, into your lstset...
    – Thruston
    12 hours ago










  • Source code and similar text printed in a fairly "wide" sans-serif non-monospaced font usually looks fine, unless there is a reason you need to line up the text columns. In Python you certainly need to line up the Indents at the start of lines, because they encode the logical structure of the code, but I don't see why the rest of the line would need to be monospaced. FWIW Algol code (an early block structured language) was printed in books with proportionally spaced fonts right from the time the language was invented in the 1960s - long before TeX.
    – alephzero
    7 hours ago















up vote
4
down vote

favorite
2












I'm currently writing some text where I discuss a python script.
So naturally, there's a lot of code in the document and it seems like listings is the default way to do so.



However, unlike what I'm used to when using latex, the default looks atrocious!
default



Non-monospaced source code!? WTF? (side question: or is there really a typographic "rule" for this?)



OK, I can fix that after a quick read of the docs with ttfamily.



ttfamily version



But this is still very weird, mostly the italic part for the comments. It just looks totally off to me.



Is this because I just happen to be used to weird fonts in my editors (Monospace Regular, not too weird, I'd guess) and this is normal and typographically sound, or is there a better option?



And if so, what would that option be? I'd rather not use some random font that I, personally, like but that is objectively bad, especially in combination with my default fonts for the text (all from Komas scrbook).



Edit:*



Obviously, I can just use "random" monospaced/typewriter fonts, but my main concern is that I'll just pick one that will not work (typographically) with the default computer modern for the body of the document. So not only should the font work as a monospaced font for readable source code, it should also not look "off" next to computer modern.
So some kind of website listing font X is compatible with font Y would probably be the most useful, but I haven't found one yet.



MWE:



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python, numbers=left, numberstyle=tiny, stepnumber=1, numbersep=5pt, tabsize=4%, basicstyle=ttfamily}

begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument









share|improve this question























  • You probably want to add columns=fullflexible, keepspaces=true, into your lstset...
    – Thruston
    12 hours ago










  • Source code and similar text printed in a fairly "wide" sans-serif non-monospaced font usually looks fine, unless there is a reason you need to line up the text columns. In Python you certainly need to line up the Indents at the start of lines, because they encode the logical structure of the code, but I don't see why the rest of the line would need to be monospaced. FWIW Algol code (an early block structured language) was printed in books with proportionally spaced fonts right from the time the language was invented in the 1960s - long before TeX.
    – alephzero
    7 hours ago













up vote
4
down vote

favorite
2









up vote
4
down vote

favorite
2






2





I'm currently writing some text where I discuss a python script.
So naturally, there's a lot of code in the document and it seems like listings is the default way to do so.



However, unlike what I'm used to when using latex, the default looks atrocious!
default



Non-monospaced source code!? WTF? (side question: or is there really a typographic "rule" for this?)



OK, I can fix that after a quick read of the docs with ttfamily.



ttfamily version



But this is still very weird, mostly the italic part for the comments. It just looks totally off to me.



Is this because I just happen to be used to weird fonts in my editors (Monospace Regular, not too weird, I'd guess) and this is normal and typographically sound, or is there a better option?



And if so, what would that option be? I'd rather not use some random font that I, personally, like but that is objectively bad, especially in combination with my default fonts for the text (all from Komas scrbook).



Edit:*



Obviously, I can just use "random" monospaced/typewriter fonts, but my main concern is that I'll just pick one that will not work (typographically) with the default computer modern for the body of the document. So not only should the font work as a monospaced font for readable source code, it should also not look "off" next to computer modern.
So some kind of website listing font X is compatible with font Y would probably be the most useful, but I haven't found one yet.



MWE:



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python, numbers=left, numberstyle=tiny, stepnumber=1, numbersep=5pt, tabsize=4%, basicstyle=ttfamily}

begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument









share|improve this question















I'm currently writing some text where I discuss a python script.
So naturally, there's a lot of code in the document and it seems like listings is the default way to do so.



However, unlike what I'm used to when using latex, the default looks atrocious!
default



Non-monospaced source code!? WTF? (side question: or is there really a typographic "rule" for this?)



OK, I can fix that after a quick read of the docs with ttfamily.



ttfamily version



But this is still very weird, mostly the italic part for the comments. It just looks totally off to me.



Is this because I just happen to be used to weird fonts in my editors (Monospace Regular, not too weird, I'd guess) and this is normal and typographically sound, or is there a better option?



And if so, what would that option be? I'd rather not use some random font that I, personally, like but that is objectively bad, especially in combination with my default fonts for the text (all from Komas scrbook).



Edit:*



Obviously, I can just use "random" monospaced/typewriter fonts, but my main concern is that I'll just pick one that will not work (typographically) with the default computer modern for the body of the document. So not only should the font work as a monospaced font for readable source code, it should also not look "off" next to computer modern.
So some kind of website listing font X is compatible with font Y would probably be the most useful, but I haven't found one yet.



MWE:



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python, numbers=left, numberstyle=tiny, stepnumber=1, numbersep=5pt, tabsize=4%, basicstyle=ttfamily}

begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument






fonts code lstlisting






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 10 hours ago

























asked 12 hours ago









JC_CL

138115




138115











  • You probably want to add columns=fullflexible, keepspaces=true, into your lstset...
    – Thruston
    12 hours ago










  • Source code and similar text printed in a fairly "wide" sans-serif non-monospaced font usually looks fine, unless there is a reason you need to line up the text columns. In Python you certainly need to line up the Indents at the start of lines, because they encode the logical structure of the code, but I don't see why the rest of the line would need to be monospaced. FWIW Algol code (an early block structured language) was printed in books with proportionally spaced fonts right from the time the language was invented in the 1960s - long before TeX.
    – alephzero
    7 hours ago

















  • You probably want to add columns=fullflexible, keepspaces=true, into your lstset...
    – Thruston
    12 hours ago










  • Source code and similar text printed in a fairly "wide" sans-serif non-monospaced font usually looks fine, unless there is a reason you need to line up the text columns. In Python you certainly need to line up the Indents at the start of lines, because they encode the logical structure of the code, but I don't see why the rest of the line would need to be monospaced. FWIW Algol code (an early block structured language) was printed in books with proportionally spaced fonts right from the time the language was invented in the 1960s - long before TeX.
    – alephzero
    7 hours ago
















You probably want to add columns=fullflexible, keepspaces=true, into your lstset...
– Thruston
12 hours ago




You probably want to add columns=fullflexible, keepspaces=true, into your lstset...
– Thruston
12 hours ago












Source code and similar text printed in a fairly "wide" sans-serif non-monospaced font usually looks fine, unless there is a reason you need to line up the text columns. In Python you certainly need to line up the Indents at the start of lines, because they encode the logical structure of the code, but I don't see why the rest of the line would need to be monospaced. FWIW Algol code (an early block structured language) was printed in books with proportionally spaced fonts right from the time the language was invented in the 1960s - long before TeX.
– alephzero
7 hours ago





Source code and similar text printed in a fairly "wide" sans-serif non-monospaced font usually looks fine, unless there is a reason you need to line up the text columns. In Python you certainly need to line up the Indents at the start of lines, because they encode the logical structure of the code, but I don't see why the rest of the line would need to be monospaced. FWIW Algol code (an early block structured language) was printed in books with proportionally spaced fonts right from the time the language was invented in the 1960s - long before TeX.
– alephzero
7 hours ago











3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
6
down vote













In my opinion the defaults in lstlisting are very odd, but it's not hard to tame them. Here is your example with a few extra keys and some colour.



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagexcolor
definecolortextbluergb.2,.2,.7
definecolortextredrgb0.54,0,0
definecolortextgreenrgb0,0.43,0
usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
keywordstyle=colortextblue,
commentstyle=colortextred,
stringstyle=colortextgreen,
frame=none,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces=true,
xleftmargin=parindent,
showstringspaces=false
begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i, "OK"
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


If you wanted comments in italics, then you just add it to the commentstyle line:



...
commentstyle=colortextreditshape,
...


this produces:



enter image description here



For more details do texdoc listings...



If you don't like the look of the default ttfamily then try some different ones. You may also need to change the body font to match the monofont of course, the default fonts may not be quite what you want, but at least they go together well.






share|improve this answer






















  • This is still ttfamily though, so having the comments in italics would just result in the same weirdness? Which of the settings controls the italics (or lack thereof), it's not readily apparent from the code.
    – JC_CL
    11 hours ago










  • @JC_CL Add to the preamble the line usepackagesourcecodepro, does this improve the result? OK, you need to have an installation including the Sourcecode Pro fonts.
    – Keks Dose
    11 hours ago










  • commentstyle=colortextreditshape I see. was searching for itali in the lstlisting docs and didn't find anything. The colors are all nice, but my main gripe is that italics look totally off, but (as per most editor defaults) comments should be in italics. usepackagesourcecodepro gives me an error, even though I installed the font, but this probably gets me into "how to mix and match fonts in a document?" hell, as does the linked question, something I'd have hoped to avoid.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • Computer Modern "typewriter italic" is one of the ugliest fonts ever invented IMO. Comic Sans is a lot better! I wonder what Knuth was thinking when he came up with it....
    – alephzero
    7 hours ago


















up vote
5
down vote













It's not simply the serif font that makes the listing awful: it's mainly the font not being monospaced, so the characters look like being thrown on the page at random.



You might color the listing: good for screen reading, less good for printed paper.



Otherwise, you could look for different monospaced font (I don't like the italic default typewriter type too).



Here's a try with SourceCode Pro, just to see whether the result looks better.



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

This is some other text.

% roughly emulate usepackagesourcecodepro
lstset
basicstyle=fontfamilySourceCodePro-TLFselectfont


beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here



OK, let's assume you like it. But it's definitely too big: we can fix it.



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagelistings

usepackage[scale=0.85]sourcecodepro

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here



There are several other monospaced fonts available, see the LaTeX font catalogue



A different choice might be LuxiMono:



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagelistings

usepackage[scaled=0.85]luximono

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i0123
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here






share|improve this answer






















  • I don't like the zero with a point inside, I find it unreadable.
    – AndréC
    10 hours ago










  • I on the other hand don't mind the dot… However, this font looks kinda off, compared to computer modern, and I'm no typographer that can judge if they fit. But it certainly is better than the atrocious italics in the default.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • luximono looks a tad better to me, but that probably is subjective. And I'd like to avoid relying on my subjective judgement. I added some clarification in the main text, maybe someone knows about some "official" rules for that.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • @JC_CL No "official” rule; personal taste is usually a good judge.
    – egreg
    10 hours ago










  • But isn't getting away from personal taste and instead using "professional" judgement the whole idea behind latex? Otherwise I'd just use Word with times new roman and comic sans like everyone else… Now I'm not saying that luximono is "wrong", but I also don't know if it is "right".
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago

















up vote
2
down vote













Personally, for listing, the fundamental criterion is that the 0 is different from the letter O.
For the inconsolata font is perfect.



inconsolata



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python, numbers=left, numberstyle=tiny, stepnumber=1, numbersep=5pt, tabsize=4, basicstyle=ttfamily
usepackageinconsolata
begindocument

This is some other text.

the 0 is not crossed out like the letter O

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
# the 0 is crossed out unlike the letter O
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument





share|improve this answer


















  • 1




    0 vs. O is certainly important (and also not handled too well in the default), but it appears that inconsolata can't deal with italic comments. Also, I'm afraid that this the dreaded mixing of unmatching fonts.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • @JC_CL Indeed, the inconsolata font has no italics.
    – AndréC
    10 hours ago










  • 0 vs O was important back in the day when computers couldn't even print lower-case letters, but if you write code in the 21st century where you need to distinguish 0 and upper-case O (or 1, upper-case I and lower-case L) in your variable names, the best solution to that issue is not "find a different font" ;)
    – alephzero
    6 hours ago











  • @alephzero What is the best solution then?
    – AndréC
    6 hours ago










Your Answer







StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "85"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f454492%2fwhat-font-to-use-for-source-code-in-a-document%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest






























3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
6
down vote













In my opinion the defaults in lstlisting are very odd, but it's not hard to tame them. Here is your example with a few extra keys and some colour.



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagexcolor
definecolortextbluergb.2,.2,.7
definecolortextredrgb0.54,0,0
definecolortextgreenrgb0,0.43,0
usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
keywordstyle=colortextblue,
commentstyle=colortextred,
stringstyle=colortextgreen,
frame=none,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces=true,
xleftmargin=parindent,
showstringspaces=false
begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i, "OK"
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


If you wanted comments in italics, then you just add it to the commentstyle line:



...
commentstyle=colortextreditshape,
...


this produces:



enter image description here



For more details do texdoc listings...



If you don't like the look of the default ttfamily then try some different ones. You may also need to change the body font to match the monofont of course, the default fonts may not be quite what you want, but at least they go together well.






share|improve this answer






















  • This is still ttfamily though, so having the comments in italics would just result in the same weirdness? Which of the settings controls the italics (or lack thereof), it's not readily apparent from the code.
    – JC_CL
    11 hours ago










  • @JC_CL Add to the preamble the line usepackagesourcecodepro, does this improve the result? OK, you need to have an installation including the Sourcecode Pro fonts.
    – Keks Dose
    11 hours ago










  • commentstyle=colortextreditshape I see. was searching for itali in the lstlisting docs and didn't find anything. The colors are all nice, but my main gripe is that italics look totally off, but (as per most editor defaults) comments should be in italics. usepackagesourcecodepro gives me an error, even though I installed the font, but this probably gets me into "how to mix and match fonts in a document?" hell, as does the linked question, something I'd have hoped to avoid.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • Computer Modern "typewriter italic" is one of the ugliest fonts ever invented IMO. Comic Sans is a lot better! I wonder what Knuth was thinking when he came up with it....
    – alephzero
    7 hours ago















up vote
6
down vote













In my opinion the defaults in lstlisting are very odd, but it's not hard to tame them. Here is your example with a few extra keys and some colour.



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagexcolor
definecolortextbluergb.2,.2,.7
definecolortextredrgb0.54,0,0
definecolortextgreenrgb0,0.43,0
usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
keywordstyle=colortextblue,
commentstyle=colortextred,
stringstyle=colortextgreen,
frame=none,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces=true,
xleftmargin=parindent,
showstringspaces=false
begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i, "OK"
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


If you wanted comments in italics, then you just add it to the commentstyle line:



...
commentstyle=colortextreditshape,
...


this produces:



enter image description here



For more details do texdoc listings...



If you don't like the look of the default ttfamily then try some different ones. You may also need to change the body font to match the monofont of course, the default fonts may not be quite what you want, but at least they go together well.






share|improve this answer






















  • This is still ttfamily though, so having the comments in italics would just result in the same weirdness? Which of the settings controls the italics (or lack thereof), it's not readily apparent from the code.
    – JC_CL
    11 hours ago










  • @JC_CL Add to the preamble the line usepackagesourcecodepro, does this improve the result? OK, you need to have an installation including the Sourcecode Pro fonts.
    – Keks Dose
    11 hours ago










  • commentstyle=colortextreditshape I see. was searching for itali in the lstlisting docs and didn't find anything. The colors are all nice, but my main gripe is that italics look totally off, but (as per most editor defaults) comments should be in italics. usepackagesourcecodepro gives me an error, even though I installed the font, but this probably gets me into "how to mix and match fonts in a document?" hell, as does the linked question, something I'd have hoped to avoid.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • Computer Modern "typewriter italic" is one of the ugliest fonts ever invented IMO. Comic Sans is a lot better! I wonder what Knuth was thinking when he came up with it....
    – alephzero
    7 hours ago













up vote
6
down vote










up vote
6
down vote









In my opinion the defaults in lstlisting are very odd, but it's not hard to tame them. Here is your example with a few extra keys and some colour.



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagexcolor
definecolortextbluergb.2,.2,.7
definecolortextredrgb0.54,0,0
definecolortextgreenrgb0,0.43,0
usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
keywordstyle=colortextblue,
commentstyle=colortextred,
stringstyle=colortextgreen,
frame=none,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces=true,
xleftmargin=parindent,
showstringspaces=false
begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i, "OK"
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


If you wanted comments in italics, then you just add it to the commentstyle line:



...
commentstyle=colortextreditshape,
...


this produces:



enter image description here



For more details do texdoc listings...



If you don't like the look of the default ttfamily then try some different ones. You may also need to change the body font to match the monofont of course, the default fonts may not be quite what you want, but at least they go together well.






share|improve this answer














In my opinion the defaults in lstlisting are very odd, but it's not hard to tame them. Here is your example with a few extra keys and some colour.



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagexcolor
definecolortextbluergb.2,.2,.7
definecolortextredrgb0.54,0,0
definecolortextgreenrgb0,0.43,0
usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
keywordstyle=colortextblue,
commentstyle=colortextred,
stringstyle=colortextgreen,
frame=none,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces=true,
xleftmargin=parindent,
showstringspaces=false
begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i, "OK"
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


If you wanted comments in italics, then you just add it to the commentstyle line:



...
commentstyle=colortextreditshape,
...


this produces:



enter image description here



For more details do texdoc listings...



If you don't like the look of the default ttfamily then try some different ones. You may also need to change the body font to match the monofont of course, the default fonts may not be quite what you want, but at least they go together well.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 11 hours ago

























answered 11 hours ago









Thruston

24.9k23988




24.9k23988











  • This is still ttfamily though, so having the comments in italics would just result in the same weirdness? Which of the settings controls the italics (or lack thereof), it's not readily apparent from the code.
    – JC_CL
    11 hours ago










  • @JC_CL Add to the preamble the line usepackagesourcecodepro, does this improve the result? OK, you need to have an installation including the Sourcecode Pro fonts.
    – Keks Dose
    11 hours ago










  • commentstyle=colortextreditshape I see. was searching for itali in the lstlisting docs and didn't find anything. The colors are all nice, but my main gripe is that italics look totally off, but (as per most editor defaults) comments should be in italics. usepackagesourcecodepro gives me an error, even though I installed the font, but this probably gets me into "how to mix and match fonts in a document?" hell, as does the linked question, something I'd have hoped to avoid.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • Computer Modern "typewriter italic" is one of the ugliest fonts ever invented IMO. Comic Sans is a lot better! I wonder what Knuth was thinking when he came up with it....
    – alephzero
    7 hours ago

















  • This is still ttfamily though, so having the comments in italics would just result in the same weirdness? Which of the settings controls the italics (or lack thereof), it's not readily apparent from the code.
    – JC_CL
    11 hours ago










  • @JC_CL Add to the preamble the line usepackagesourcecodepro, does this improve the result? OK, you need to have an installation including the Sourcecode Pro fonts.
    – Keks Dose
    11 hours ago










  • commentstyle=colortextreditshape I see. was searching for itali in the lstlisting docs and didn't find anything. The colors are all nice, but my main gripe is that italics look totally off, but (as per most editor defaults) comments should be in italics. usepackagesourcecodepro gives me an error, even though I installed the font, but this probably gets me into "how to mix and match fonts in a document?" hell, as does the linked question, something I'd have hoped to avoid.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • Computer Modern "typewriter italic" is one of the ugliest fonts ever invented IMO. Comic Sans is a lot better! I wonder what Knuth was thinking when he came up with it....
    – alephzero
    7 hours ago
















This is still ttfamily though, so having the comments in italics would just result in the same weirdness? Which of the settings controls the italics (or lack thereof), it's not readily apparent from the code.
– JC_CL
11 hours ago




This is still ttfamily though, so having the comments in italics would just result in the same weirdness? Which of the settings controls the italics (or lack thereof), it's not readily apparent from the code.
– JC_CL
11 hours ago












@JC_CL Add to the preamble the line usepackagesourcecodepro, does this improve the result? OK, you need to have an installation including the Sourcecode Pro fonts.
– Keks Dose
11 hours ago




@JC_CL Add to the preamble the line usepackagesourcecodepro, does this improve the result? OK, you need to have an installation including the Sourcecode Pro fonts.
– Keks Dose
11 hours ago












commentstyle=colortextreditshape I see. was searching for itali in the lstlisting docs and didn't find anything. The colors are all nice, but my main gripe is that italics look totally off, but (as per most editor defaults) comments should be in italics. usepackagesourcecodepro gives me an error, even though I installed the font, but this probably gets me into "how to mix and match fonts in a document?" hell, as does the linked question, something I'd have hoped to avoid.
– JC_CL
10 hours ago




commentstyle=colortextreditshape I see. was searching for itali in the lstlisting docs and didn't find anything. The colors are all nice, but my main gripe is that italics look totally off, but (as per most editor defaults) comments should be in italics. usepackagesourcecodepro gives me an error, even though I installed the font, but this probably gets me into "how to mix and match fonts in a document?" hell, as does the linked question, something I'd have hoped to avoid.
– JC_CL
10 hours ago












Computer Modern "typewriter italic" is one of the ugliest fonts ever invented IMO. Comic Sans is a lot better! I wonder what Knuth was thinking when he came up with it....
– alephzero
7 hours ago





Computer Modern "typewriter italic" is one of the ugliest fonts ever invented IMO. Comic Sans is a lot better! I wonder what Knuth was thinking when he came up with it....
– alephzero
7 hours ago











up vote
5
down vote













It's not simply the serif font that makes the listing awful: it's mainly the font not being monospaced, so the characters look like being thrown on the page at random.



You might color the listing: good for screen reading, less good for printed paper.



Otherwise, you could look for different monospaced font (I don't like the italic default typewriter type too).



Here's a try with SourceCode Pro, just to see whether the result looks better.



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

This is some other text.

% roughly emulate usepackagesourcecodepro
lstset
basicstyle=fontfamilySourceCodePro-TLFselectfont


beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here



OK, let's assume you like it. But it's definitely too big: we can fix it.



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagelistings

usepackage[scale=0.85]sourcecodepro

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here



There are several other monospaced fonts available, see the LaTeX font catalogue



A different choice might be LuxiMono:



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagelistings

usepackage[scaled=0.85]luximono

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i0123
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here






share|improve this answer






















  • I don't like the zero with a point inside, I find it unreadable.
    – AndréC
    10 hours ago










  • I on the other hand don't mind the dot… However, this font looks kinda off, compared to computer modern, and I'm no typographer that can judge if they fit. But it certainly is better than the atrocious italics in the default.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • luximono looks a tad better to me, but that probably is subjective. And I'd like to avoid relying on my subjective judgement. I added some clarification in the main text, maybe someone knows about some "official" rules for that.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • @JC_CL No "official” rule; personal taste is usually a good judge.
    – egreg
    10 hours ago










  • But isn't getting away from personal taste and instead using "professional" judgement the whole idea behind latex? Otherwise I'd just use Word with times new roman and comic sans like everyone else… Now I'm not saying that luximono is "wrong", but I also don't know if it is "right".
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago














up vote
5
down vote













It's not simply the serif font that makes the listing awful: it's mainly the font not being monospaced, so the characters look like being thrown on the page at random.



You might color the listing: good for screen reading, less good for printed paper.



Otherwise, you could look for different monospaced font (I don't like the italic default typewriter type too).



Here's a try with SourceCode Pro, just to see whether the result looks better.



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

This is some other text.

% roughly emulate usepackagesourcecodepro
lstset
basicstyle=fontfamilySourceCodePro-TLFselectfont


beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here



OK, let's assume you like it. But it's definitely too big: we can fix it.



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagelistings

usepackage[scale=0.85]sourcecodepro

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here



There are several other monospaced fonts available, see the LaTeX font catalogue



A different choice might be LuxiMono:



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagelistings

usepackage[scaled=0.85]luximono

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i0123
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here






share|improve this answer






















  • I don't like the zero with a point inside, I find it unreadable.
    – AndréC
    10 hours ago










  • I on the other hand don't mind the dot… However, this font looks kinda off, compared to computer modern, and I'm no typographer that can judge if they fit. But it certainly is better than the atrocious italics in the default.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • luximono looks a tad better to me, but that probably is subjective. And I'd like to avoid relying on my subjective judgement. I added some clarification in the main text, maybe someone knows about some "official" rules for that.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • @JC_CL No "official” rule; personal taste is usually a good judge.
    – egreg
    10 hours ago










  • But isn't getting away from personal taste and instead using "professional" judgement the whole idea behind latex? Otherwise I'd just use Word with times new roman and comic sans like everyone else… Now I'm not saying that luximono is "wrong", but I also don't know if it is "right".
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago












up vote
5
down vote










up vote
5
down vote









It's not simply the serif font that makes the listing awful: it's mainly the font not being monospaced, so the characters look like being thrown on the page at random.



You might color the listing: good for screen reading, less good for printed paper.



Otherwise, you could look for different monospaced font (I don't like the italic default typewriter type too).



Here's a try with SourceCode Pro, just to see whether the result looks better.



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

This is some other text.

% roughly emulate usepackagesourcecodepro
lstset
basicstyle=fontfamilySourceCodePro-TLFselectfont


beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here



OK, let's assume you like it. But it's definitely too big: we can fix it.



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagelistings

usepackage[scale=0.85]sourcecodepro

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here



There are several other monospaced fonts available, see the LaTeX font catalogue



A different choice might be LuxiMono:



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagelistings

usepackage[scaled=0.85]luximono

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i0123
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here






share|improve this answer














It's not simply the serif font that makes the listing awful: it's mainly the font not being monospaced, so the characters look like being thrown on the page at random.



You might color the listing: good for screen reading, less good for printed paper.



Otherwise, you could look for different monospaced font (I don't like the italic default typewriter type too).



Here's a try with SourceCode Pro, just to see whether the result looks better.



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

This is some other text.

% roughly emulate usepackagesourcecodepro
lstset
basicstyle=fontfamilySourceCodePro-TLFselectfont


beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here



OK, let's assume you like it. But it's definitely too big: we can fix it.



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagelistings

usepackage[scale=0.85]sourcecodepro

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here



There are several other monospaced fonts available, see the LaTeX font catalogue



A different choice might be LuxiMono:



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc
usepackagelistings

usepackage[scaled=0.85]luximono

lstset
language=Python,
numbers=left,
numberstyle=tiny,
stepnumber=1,
numbersep=5pt,
tabsize=4,
basicstyle=ttfamily,
columns=fullflexible,
keepspaces,


begindocument

This is some other text.

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i0123
# prints every entry in a list
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument


enter image description here







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 10 hours ago

























answered 10 hours ago









egreg

688k8418323080




688k8418323080











  • I don't like the zero with a point inside, I find it unreadable.
    – AndréC
    10 hours ago










  • I on the other hand don't mind the dot… However, this font looks kinda off, compared to computer modern, and I'm no typographer that can judge if they fit. But it certainly is better than the atrocious italics in the default.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • luximono looks a tad better to me, but that probably is subjective. And I'd like to avoid relying on my subjective judgement. I added some clarification in the main text, maybe someone knows about some "official" rules for that.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • @JC_CL No "official” rule; personal taste is usually a good judge.
    – egreg
    10 hours ago










  • But isn't getting away from personal taste and instead using "professional" judgement the whole idea behind latex? Otherwise I'd just use Word with times new roman and comic sans like everyone else… Now I'm not saying that luximono is "wrong", but I also don't know if it is "right".
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago
















  • I don't like the zero with a point inside, I find it unreadable.
    – AndréC
    10 hours ago










  • I on the other hand don't mind the dot… However, this font looks kinda off, compared to computer modern, and I'm no typographer that can judge if they fit. But it certainly is better than the atrocious italics in the default.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • luximono looks a tad better to me, but that probably is subjective. And I'd like to avoid relying on my subjective judgement. I added some clarification in the main text, maybe someone knows about some "official" rules for that.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • @JC_CL No "official” rule; personal taste is usually a good judge.
    – egreg
    10 hours ago










  • But isn't getting away from personal taste and instead using "professional" judgement the whole idea behind latex? Otherwise I'd just use Word with times new roman and comic sans like everyone else… Now I'm not saying that luximono is "wrong", but I also don't know if it is "right".
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago















I don't like the zero with a point inside, I find it unreadable.
– AndréC
10 hours ago




I don't like the zero with a point inside, I find it unreadable.
– AndréC
10 hours ago












I on the other hand don't mind the dot… However, this font looks kinda off, compared to computer modern, and I'm no typographer that can judge if they fit. But it certainly is better than the atrocious italics in the default.
– JC_CL
10 hours ago




I on the other hand don't mind the dot… However, this font looks kinda off, compared to computer modern, and I'm no typographer that can judge if they fit. But it certainly is better than the atrocious italics in the default.
– JC_CL
10 hours ago












luximono looks a tad better to me, but that probably is subjective. And I'd like to avoid relying on my subjective judgement. I added some clarification in the main text, maybe someone knows about some "official" rules for that.
– JC_CL
10 hours ago




luximono looks a tad better to me, but that probably is subjective. And I'd like to avoid relying on my subjective judgement. I added some clarification in the main text, maybe someone knows about some "official" rules for that.
– JC_CL
10 hours ago












@JC_CL No "official” rule; personal taste is usually a good judge.
– egreg
10 hours ago




@JC_CL No "official” rule; personal taste is usually a good judge.
– egreg
10 hours ago












But isn't getting away from personal taste and instead using "professional" judgement the whole idea behind latex? Otherwise I'd just use Word with times new roman and comic sans like everyone else… Now I'm not saying that luximono is "wrong", but I also don't know if it is "right".
– JC_CL
10 hours ago




But isn't getting away from personal taste and instead using "professional" judgement the whole idea behind latex? Otherwise I'd just use Word with times new roman and comic sans like everyone else… Now I'm not saying that luximono is "wrong", but I also don't know if it is "right".
– JC_CL
10 hours ago










up vote
2
down vote













Personally, for listing, the fundamental criterion is that the 0 is different from the letter O.
For the inconsolata font is perfect.



inconsolata



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python, numbers=left, numberstyle=tiny, stepnumber=1, numbersep=5pt, tabsize=4, basicstyle=ttfamily
usepackageinconsolata
begindocument

This is some other text.

the 0 is not crossed out like the letter O

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
# the 0 is crossed out unlike the letter O
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument





share|improve this answer


















  • 1




    0 vs. O is certainly important (and also not handled too well in the default), but it appears that inconsolata can't deal with italic comments. Also, I'm afraid that this the dreaded mixing of unmatching fonts.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • @JC_CL Indeed, the inconsolata font has no italics.
    – AndréC
    10 hours ago










  • 0 vs O was important back in the day when computers couldn't even print lower-case letters, but if you write code in the 21st century where you need to distinguish 0 and upper-case O (or 1, upper-case I and lower-case L) in your variable names, the best solution to that issue is not "find a different font" ;)
    – alephzero
    6 hours ago











  • @alephzero What is the best solution then?
    – AndréC
    6 hours ago














up vote
2
down vote













Personally, for listing, the fundamental criterion is that the 0 is different from the letter O.
For the inconsolata font is perfect.



inconsolata



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python, numbers=left, numberstyle=tiny, stepnumber=1, numbersep=5pt, tabsize=4, basicstyle=ttfamily
usepackageinconsolata
begindocument

This is some other text.

the 0 is not crossed out like the letter O

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
# the 0 is crossed out unlike the letter O
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument





share|improve this answer


















  • 1




    0 vs. O is certainly important (and also not handled too well in the default), but it appears that inconsolata can't deal with italic comments. Also, I'm afraid that this the dreaded mixing of unmatching fonts.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • @JC_CL Indeed, the inconsolata font has no italics.
    – AndréC
    10 hours ago










  • 0 vs O was important back in the day when computers couldn't even print lower-case letters, but if you write code in the 21st century where you need to distinguish 0 and upper-case O (or 1, upper-case I and lower-case L) in your variable names, the best solution to that issue is not "find a different font" ;)
    – alephzero
    6 hours ago











  • @alephzero What is the best solution then?
    – AndréC
    6 hours ago












up vote
2
down vote










up vote
2
down vote









Personally, for listing, the fundamental criterion is that the 0 is different from the letter O.
For the inconsolata font is perfect.



inconsolata



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python, numbers=left, numberstyle=tiny, stepnumber=1, numbersep=5pt, tabsize=4, basicstyle=ttfamily
usepackageinconsolata
begindocument

This is some other text.

the 0 is not crossed out like the letter O

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
# the 0 is crossed out unlike the letter O
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument





share|improve this answer














Personally, for listing, the fundamental criterion is that the 0 is different from the letter O.
For the inconsolata font is perfect.



inconsolata



documentclass[a4paper,11pt, headings=normal, toc=bibliography, toc=listof]scrbook
usepackage[T1]fontenc
usepackage[utf8]inputenc

usepackagelistings
lstsetlanguage=Python, numbers=left, numberstyle=tiny, stepnumber=1, numbersep=5pt, tabsize=4, basicstyle=ttfamily
usepackageinconsolata
begindocument

This is some other text.

the 0 is not crossed out like the letter O

beginlstlisting
for i in list:
print i
# prints every entry in a list
# the 0 is crossed out unlike the letter O
endlstlisting

This here is also non, sourcecode text.

enddocument






share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 10 hours ago

























answered 10 hours ago









AndréC

3,586729




3,586729







  • 1




    0 vs. O is certainly important (and also not handled too well in the default), but it appears that inconsolata can't deal with italic comments. Also, I'm afraid that this the dreaded mixing of unmatching fonts.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • @JC_CL Indeed, the inconsolata font has no italics.
    – AndréC
    10 hours ago










  • 0 vs O was important back in the day when computers couldn't even print lower-case letters, but if you write code in the 21st century where you need to distinguish 0 and upper-case O (or 1, upper-case I and lower-case L) in your variable names, the best solution to that issue is not "find a different font" ;)
    – alephzero
    6 hours ago











  • @alephzero What is the best solution then?
    – AndréC
    6 hours ago












  • 1




    0 vs. O is certainly important (and also not handled too well in the default), but it appears that inconsolata can't deal with italic comments. Also, I'm afraid that this the dreaded mixing of unmatching fonts.
    – JC_CL
    10 hours ago










  • @JC_CL Indeed, the inconsolata font has no italics.
    – AndréC
    10 hours ago










  • 0 vs O was important back in the day when computers couldn't even print lower-case letters, but if you write code in the 21st century where you need to distinguish 0 and upper-case O (or 1, upper-case I and lower-case L) in your variable names, the best solution to that issue is not "find a different font" ;)
    – alephzero
    6 hours ago











  • @alephzero What is the best solution then?
    – AndréC
    6 hours ago







1




1




0 vs. O is certainly important (and also not handled too well in the default), but it appears that inconsolata can't deal with italic comments. Also, I'm afraid that this the dreaded mixing of unmatching fonts.
– JC_CL
10 hours ago




0 vs. O is certainly important (and also not handled too well in the default), but it appears that inconsolata can't deal with italic comments. Also, I'm afraid that this the dreaded mixing of unmatching fonts.
– JC_CL
10 hours ago












@JC_CL Indeed, the inconsolata font has no italics.
– AndréC
10 hours ago




@JC_CL Indeed, the inconsolata font has no italics.
– AndréC
10 hours ago












0 vs O was important back in the day when computers couldn't even print lower-case letters, but if you write code in the 21st century where you need to distinguish 0 and upper-case O (or 1, upper-case I and lower-case L) in your variable names, the best solution to that issue is not "find a different font" ;)
– alephzero
6 hours ago





0 vs O was important back in the day when computers couldn't even print lower-case letters, but if you write code in the 21st century where you need to distinguish 0 and upper-case O (or 1, upper-case I and lower-case L) in your variable names, the best solution to that issue is not "find a different font" ;)
– alephzero
6 hours ago













@alephzero What is the best solution then?
– AndréC
6 hours ago




@alephzero What is the best solution then?
– AndréC
6 hours ago

















 

draft saved


draft discarded















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f454492%2fwhat-font-to-use-for-source-code-in-a-document%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest













































































Popular posts from this blog

How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

Bahrain

Postfix configuration issue with fips on centos 7; mailgun relay