Adrien Tétar

It's easy to get obsessed over this kind of details. Usually I just set my overshoots to about the same value or according to the shape width, then after modeling all your glyphs when you print test pages you can actually look and tweak overshoots if needed.

> and replace it with:

(nitpicking but) you can do better than that: since you have the list of glyph names you care about, you don't need to loop through all glyphs in the font:

for font in AllFonts():
    for n in diacritics:
        if n not in font: continue
        glyph = font[n]
        # do things with the glyph

Simon Dunford said:

As Thierry stated — I defiantly was trying to step away from traditional letterform similarities and make unique attributes

As someone who makes type on its own too, I would say: don't worry particularly about putting distinctive features – for an amateur this often means putting things that are out of whack.
The real challenge is to have an harmonious set of letters, not to make it different – that's quite counter-intuitive, I know the first thing people ask when you say you're making type is "how is it different from other fonts?".
But the process of crafting typeface will yield something distinctive. And with fonts, the devil is in the details; the texture of the whole and paragraph-level variables (like width, spacing) are much more significant than construction details of a single letter.

The Gemeli Mono type specimen includes an essay on the history of monospace typefaces.

Using FontKit you have font.availableFeatures