Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 168 posts

Re: Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours

#151

Post by graemep »

pg83 wrote: post #93
jcelerier wrote: post #90

> Shitty is moving from the imported GPL baseline to an MIT-only codebase. It does not intend to retain the GPL as the final project license. that's really something that cannot be done if you don't have the original right of the code. It's 100% derived work and thus has to preserve GPL license, even if you rewrite every single line.

I'll probably stick to the perspective expressed to me by the lawyer (I actually consulted on this topic), rather than the opinion of some random "GPL zealot" on the internet. The procedure described has been done many times, is well described, and is quite feasible, albeit quite complex. I think I can handle it! And, in any case, anyone who wants to can sue me in a real court, not an online one.

I am more interested in why ?. Do you think its likely that people will want to use this code in proprietary software and you do not want the GPL to block this ? Do you feel as a matter of principle that people are free to do so regardless of whether they actually want to or not?

Re: Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours

#152

Post by naikrovek »

teo_zero wrote: post #122
naikrovek wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood this stance. I’ve heard this for 30 years and I still don’t understand why people feel entitled enough to enjoy the benefits of someone else’s work without giving anything back. Forcing someone to release their code for free isn’t freedom, that’s a lack of freedom. Oh, you want the code to be free. Well guess what? MIT licensed means you can have it. Oh, you want a third party’s changes to be made…

I'm confused. You begin your post with a stance that's typical of copyleft proponents, then you end it in the opposite direction. There is a trait in human nature that pushes us to share our knowledge. But we would like this sharing to be mutual. When I publish a piece of software for free, I would like others to read it, comment it, give me suggestions on how to make it better, and the whole community can benefit fr…

we all would like people to share their code with us, but forcing them to because of your license is extremely anti-freedom to me.

address this culturally, that is the only way to address this completely. legal means cannot fundamentally redirect the culture of a society and make them believe that sharing is better for everyone. if you want a society that shares what it creates, then help create THAT. forcing people to do it pushes them in the opposite direction, they want to grasp their things even tighter than before.

Re: Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours

#153

Post by naikrovek »

kaliqt wrote: post #105
naikrovek wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain why you think so? Seems like a very childish name to me. Like a neighborhood kid outside on his bike yelling “shit” then pedaling away as fast as he can, to dissociate himself from the event out of fear of getting caught. FaTTY - Fast Terminal (executable named “ft”) RaTTY - Rapid Terminal (“rt”) LighTTY - Lightspeed Terminal (“lt”) Dragster (“dt”) McQueen (“mt”) Names are hard, but it’s trivial to co…

I am certain the name was chosen purposefully because damn is it funny.

if you think "shitty" is a funny name then there is nothing anyone can ever do to convince you otherwise. you are so far out of reach that only maturing can cure this.

if you are over 30, you are out of reach to anyone and everyone.

Re: Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours

#154

Post by grg0 »

rdslw wrote: post #147
pg83 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expert opinion versus expert opinion. I will probably stick to my point of view and suggest that you either offer a benchmark or show a specific problem in my code, without speculation on the topic of LLM.

these days on HN, if you oppose someone, you get dead-flagged. I vouched for your comment, as I find it perfectly 'not agreeing' answer.

It wasn't me flagging, by the way.

The burden of proof also falls on the person making the claim.

Re: Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours

#155

Post by grg0 »

pg83 wrote: post #92
grg0 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm provably doing the minimum amount of work possible. That is a very bold claim to make for the amount of render code generated by the LLM. It's not obvious what the critical path even is, which is what would bound the latency. And I mean actual code, not just some informal description of what happens.

Expert opinion versus expert opinion. I will probably stick to my point of view and suggest that you either offer a benchmark or show a specific problem in my code, without speculation on the topic of LLM.

Sorry, but you simply prompted an LLM and didn't even bother reviewing the output per our other discussion about pthreads. I'm not sure you can claim to be an expert, let alone put your opinion on the same level as mine.

Re: Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours

#156

Post by teo_zero »

naikrovek wrote: post #152
teo_zero wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused. You begin your post with a stance that's typical of copyleft proponents, then you end it in the opposite direction. There is a trait in human nature that pushes us to share our knowledge. But we would like this sharing to be mutual. When I publish a piece of software for free, I would like others to read it, comment it, give me suggestions on how to make it better, and the whole community can benefit fr…

we all would like people to share their code with us, but forcing them to because of your license is extremely anti-freedom to me. address this culturally, that is the only way to address this completely. legal means cannot fundamentally redirect the culture of a society and make them believe that sharing is better for everyone. if you want a society that shares what it creates, then help create THAT. forcing people…

Absolutely. That's how coding used to work in the 70s. Then software passed from people to companies, which proved alien to the cultural values that had hold so far. At the end of the 80s Stallman designed something to address the corporate world with a language they would understand. They had copyright, he created copyleft.

Now, please reread your post replacing "people" with "corporations" and check if it still sounds reasonable.

Re: Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours

#157

Post by andyroid »

naikrovek wrote: post #152
teo_zero wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused. You begin your post with a stance that's typical of copyleft proponents, then you end it in the opposite direction. There is a trait in human nature that pushes us to share our knowledge. But we would like this sharing to be mutual. When I publish a piece of software for free, I would like others to read it, comment it, give me suggestions on how to make it better, and the whole community can benefit fr…

we all would like people to share their code with us, but forcing them to because of your license is extremely anti-freedom to me. address this culturally, that is the only way to address this completely. legal means cannot fundamentally redirect the culture of a society and make them believe that sharing is better for everyone. if you want a society that shares what it creates, then help create THAT. forcing people…

“we all would like corporations to share their products with us, but forcing us to pay because of their proprietary license is extremely anti-freedom to me”

No one is forcing you to do anything, and least of all which software licenses to depend on. If you don’t like something, choose something else. Freedom, you know?

Re: Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours

#158

Post by ku1ik »

pg83 wrote: post #89
quotemstr wrote: post #53

Excellent use of Ragel to generate fast state machines. Everyone should check it out: https://www.colm.net/open-source/ragel/ The author of shitty encoded the whole terminal state machine in Ragel: https://github.com/pg83/shitty/blob/master/parser.rl The thing generates one of big DFA with actions for everything that can ever happen in the terminal. Precisely correct way to do it. Plus, Ragel is a joy to program once…

I'm glad someone noticed this, but ragel is a very niche tool; few people have heard of it! I believe my parser is the first complete description of a terminal output parser in FSM form, and that alone is quite valuable.

No it’s not.

https://www.vt100.net/emu/dec_ansi_parser

Paul Williams made this years (if not decades) ago, and it has been widely used by terminal emulator implementers.

Re: Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours

#159

Post by em-bee »

pg83 wrote: post #8
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #5

> The executable is named st; the desktop application and icon are named shitty That conflicts with the already existing suckless st. Also I am suitably impressed with the perf numbers, but I also somewhat take away that I could stick with (at least) alacritty or ghostty and not be much slower.

I know, but there aren't that many two-letter abbreviations!

how about tree letters? sht?

Re: Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours

#160

Post by pg83 »

mitchellh wrote: post #103

Creator of Ghostty here. Always a fan of new terminals. I noticed your benchmarks are against Ghostty 1.3.1, which is fair, since its the latest released, but our IO throughputs in particularly the areas you tested have improved by more than double on some machines, so if you get a chance, I would ask you rebenchmark on `main`. I don't know if it'd be faster than your terminal or not, but it'd be significantly faster…

We're currently tied in wall (yours is better at ASCII, while random is worse). But considering that user is better for me in both cases (algorithmic), we'll still have a chance to compete. :)) I've updated the tables.
Post reply on HN