Has features ✅
this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
-47 points (18.7% liked)
Programming
17402 readers
105 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Damn. Alacritty has no features?
Lmao. It is more barebones but yeah "feature: none" is a real jab
What do the exclamation points mean?
Yeah, I’d say Kitty and Alacritty work pretty well on Linux. Makes this comparison table seem like bs
Kitty on macos is absolutely fine too
That the guy making the table is pulling things out of their arse, basically.
Here is the review by a closed beta tester.
https://hanna.lol/p/ghost-in-the-terminal/
Here is the video where he talks about the optimization done in ghostty
They explain it a bit here: https://mitchellh.com/writing/ghostty-and-useful-zig-patterns
Also, calling out the warning signs, my bar for a native platform experience is that the app feels and acts like a purpose-built native app. I don't think this bar is unreasonable. For example, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that Alacritty is kind of not native because new windows create new processes. Or that Kitty is kind of not native because tabs use a non-native widget. And so on (there are many more examples for each).
So nothing wrong with Kitty on MacOS e.g., but the "feel" is not native. Personally don't care too much about that, but the author seems to do.
This smells like bullshit because it’s just based on things users do not see (processes) or do not care about (the style used for your tabs).
Yeah I agree the table is very odd, but the project looks awesome anyway. Some users may care about things using native widgets when it comes to theming and stuff, though I wouldn't even know what I'd call "native" on Linux. Is GTK native? Qt?
He seems to target GTK based on his statement:
"On macOS, the main GUI experience is written in Swift using AppKit and SwiftUI. The tabs are native tabs, the splits are native UI components, multi-window works as you'd expect, etc. On Linux, the GUI experience is GTK using real GTK windows and other widgets.
Features such as error messages are not implemented with a specialized terminal view, we actually use real native UI components. The point is, while the terminal surface and core logic is cross-platform, the user interaction is all purpose-built for each operating system for a true native experience."
https://mitchellh.com/writing/ghostty-and-useful-zig-patterns
✅ but I can't give the competitors too many ✅ so let's go with ⚠️
Unsure, I am using kitty with a very minimal config on MacOS and it works well. Haven’t had any bugs. Seems more like marketing to me (the image)
https://mitchellh.com/writing/ghostty-is-coming
It was discussed in details in his presentation (the link is in the article).
Kitty is mentioned once in the article and that’s it. Doesn’t even mention its downside and how ghostty is so much better according to them.
It’s a great project and all, but I’d love if people could stop stomping on others work just to appear better.
Mitchell's talk has some proof
Only says it’s fast on some specific benchmarks against alacrity. Not talking about why alacrity or kitty would not work on Linux/mac while ghostty does.
Sure, it’s interesting that he managed to optimize so many things. But the claims in the picture are unproven.
Not talking about why alacrity or kitty would not work on Linux/mac while ghostty does.
Does the picture/article claim alacritty or kitty would not work on Linux/mac? Where can I read that?
It's the misleading exclamation mark. If I see this picture, my impression is that kitty works only with issues on Linux
Also, what does « features » mean? Why does alacrity have none?
kitty should be 4 check marks
I use alacritty on Linux every day, hell I didn’t even realize it ran under Windows
Seems the pitch is just that it supports Apple specific bells and whistles like the emoji bar and beyond that has the stuff other terminals have. I use tilda and use that because it has a critical core feature I haven't seen in other terminals: it appears full screen over all other windows with a keypress and disappears the same way. Since I use terminal heavily I don't want to treat it as just another window but as a first class experience which tilda allows. I don't really get why you'd make yet another terminal without some fundamental core functionality difference like that.
Yakuake also has that
OP should include the link.
Lemmy still doesn't let someone post an embedded link and picture. People don't realize that you have to include the linkin the body of the post which is annoying and intuitive, specially because when creating a new post Lemmy will allow you to fill out both form fields for link and picture but only use one.
Weird table. I use Foot which is pretty fucking fast and does everything I need except panes so I might check this one out.
Just had a look at Kitty and from what I understand, it's an emulator, and it's fast, has ligatures.
Since I rarely use terminal outside of VS Code, i.e. zsh shell on Mac, I don't quite understand what would I get from it?
Reviews say it's fast, has low latency between typing and the text appearing on the screen - I'm not seeing latency either way. The text is there, can it get any faster? 😅
Well, since I hate myself, I will keep using st.
I think that Hashimoto is using this project to iron out details that are left unaddressed due to convenience for other projects and the very low impact of any single issue Hashimoto has addressed. But much like with Apple projects, Hashimoto intends for the the end product to have greater value than the sum of the parts. Unlike Apple, it will be perfomant cross platform.
I think the only way to evaluate a project like this is to ignore the feature comparison charts and use it to see if it really is better when those details are addressed. I have a feeling that many people will agree and most will shrug their shoulders and not give it a second look if they even gave it a first one.
I'll be trying Ghostty out soon. I hope it's great. But I'm not expecting to be blown away.
I'm late to this, but could a kind soul explain what I'm missing out on by using urxvt? I settled on it years ago and haven't changed anything.