• SuperFola
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 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.

      • tun@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        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?

        • Soviet Pigeon@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s the misleading exclamation mark. If I see this picture, my impression is that kitty works only with issues on Linux

          • SuperFola
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Also, what does « features » mean? Why does alacrity have none?

          • tun@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Agree on the misleading table. To make it worse, OP didn’t include the Mitchell’s article link.

            Table alone does not paint the complete picture (and marking Alacritty has no features is too absurd). Alacritty lacks features but exclamation would be better suited (instead of cross).

            Some of the features Alacritty does not have

            • ligature
            • tabs
            • split
            • layouts
            • terminal graphics protocol (at least Kitty)