• petey@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, I’d say Kitty and Alacritty work pretty well on Linux. Makes this comparison table seem like bs

    • Treeniks@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      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.

      • SuperFola@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        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).

      • SuperFola@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        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.

          • SuperFola@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            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.