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

St – A simple terminal implementation for X

st.suckless.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 223 posts

Re: St – A simple terminal implementation for X

#151

Post by Aissen »

xvilka wrote: post #61
eriknstr wrote: post #56

Personally I am enjoying terminology very much. https://www.enlightenment.org/about-terminology

Sadly Terminology doesn't have support for 24bit RGB sequences (true color): https://gist.github.com/XVilka/8346728

It's honestly not the most important limitation of Terminology (except maybe to you). It doesn't support re-ordering or renaming tabs. It doesn't support searching into scrollback. It doesn't fetch terminfo data.

It's still the best terminal emulator out there. Incredibly fast in software-only, even better when hardware accelerated, skinnable and configurable.

Re: St – A simple terminal implementation for X

#152

Post by Lapsa »

Gonzih wrote: post #104
daenney wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on what criteria and experiences? I've been running it for a year with a slew of plugins for example and haven't experienced a single hiccup.

Big part my plugins just do not work still in neovim.

Try spartan way for vim too. Used to have huge list of plugins and exotic vim hacks in my `.vimrc`, nowadays ain't even using plugin manager. `:colorscheme blue` and off you go.

Re: St – A simple terminal implementation for X

#153

Post by [deleted] »

daef wrote: post #144
kv-1 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm not saying that the way they wrote it makes sense, but you have to remember that sizeof is actually an operator and not a function.

just got basically the same answer on stackoverflow - sizeof is an operator -> works w/o parens - makes sense - that's why i'm asking

[deleted]

Re: St – A simple terminal implementation for X

#155

Post by davidgerard »

fiatjaf wrote: post #132

That xterm README is from 1991. I believe it has improved a lot since.

It is also, in practice, actively maintained and gets bugfixes. It turns out there are a metric buttload of obscure corner cases that do need to work right.

Here's the changelog: http://invisible-island.net/xterm/xterm.log.html

xterm is addressing a vastly broader audience than st.

Re: St – A simple terminal implementation for X

#156

Post by davidgerard »

chriswarbo wrote: post #113
smlacy wrote: post #2

Why do people care so much about terminal emulators and their supposed "bloat" and "complexity"?

The way I see it, st is trying to replace xterm. xterm is a de facto standard, in that you can sit down in front of a machine which appears to be running some flavour of Unix, it doesn't matter if it's Gnome, KDE, TWM, CDE, etc., GNU or BSD or Solaris or whatever, you'll probably be able to find xterm and work out the rest from there. Many devs/hackers use xterm as their day-to-day terminal, and seem to approximate A…

xterm is actively maintained and cares about a whole pile of corner cases that were enough for users to raise valid bugs. See the changelog: http://invisible-island.net/xterm/xterm.log.html

Re: St – A simple terminal implementation for X

#157

Post by hobarrera »

aexaey wrote: post #86
ycmbntrthrwaway wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scrollback is implemented as a patch: http://st.suckless.org/patches/scrollback

This. Also, one should keep in mind that having to apply personal patches is perfectly acceptable for suckless software. In fact, for the very same st, to change font, colour scheme, or hotkeys/shortcuts - one has to edit config.h file and recompile. There is no traditional text config file or "Preferences" menu. This might sound bizarre at first, but actually works as well as editing a text config file: config.h is…

What I dislike about this, is that I have to manually track new versions -- rather than just have my package manager pull in new versions that read a `st.conf` file.

Re: St – A simple terminal implementation for X

#158

Post by vog »

aexaey wrote: post #86
ycmbntrthrwaway wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scrollback is implemented as a patch: http://st.suckless.org/patches/scrollback

This. Also, one should keep in mind that having to apply personal patches is perfectly acceptable for suckless software. In fact, for the very same st, to change font, colour scheme, or hotkeys/shortcuts - one has to edit config.h file and recompile. There is no traditional text config file or "Preferences" menu. This might sound bizarre at first, but actually works as well as editing a text config file: config.h is…

> Also, one should keep in mind that having to apply personal patches is perfectly acceptable for suckless software.

I don't get it. This patch increases the code base by merely 60 lines of code (104 insertions, 44 deletions).

Is 60 lines already considered bloat, in a verbose language like C?

Also, is this meant to lead to fewer complexity? Maintaining the patch separately from the code base is nothing but cumbersome. Essentially this is a long-time feature branch, which is a well-known anti-pattern regarding software quality and maintenance. What if there are more and more of such patches? What if they overlap and can't be applied together? In a central code base these formal conflicts would be resolved once and for everyone, early on.

I would have expected this feature (and its code) to be enabled/disabled by a single #define in config.h. That would be more consistent with the suckless philosophy of configuration. Or, reducing that bloat by simply enabling it always.

Re: St – A simple terminal implementation for X

#159

Post by hobarrera »

Lapsa wrote: post #154
hiq wrote: post #103

Is there a full-screen mode? I often use it with gnome-terminal and the vim-goyo plugin, it's pretty neat.

using i3 win+F here

THIS!

I wish apps would stop implementing their own fullscreen functionality/hotkeys/etc, and we could all start relying on window managers (or DE's) to provide this.

On-topic, I really like that if I super+F firefox, it actually behaves full-screenish and hides the its bars. I wish most apps would do this.

Re: St – A simple terminal implementation for X

#160

Post by dhimes »

hobarrera wrote: post #157
aexaey wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. Also, one should keep in mind that having to apply personal patches is perfectly acceptable for suckless software. In fact, for the very same st, to change font, colour scheme, or hotkeys/shortcuts - one has to edit config.h file and recompile. There is no traditional text config file or "Preferences" menu. This might sound bizarre at first, but actually works as well as editing a text config file: config.h is…

What I dislike about this, is that I have to manually track new versions -- rather than just have my package manager pull in new versions that read a `st.conf` file.

Also, I like different colors for different things. Production server terminals look different that staging server terminals that look different than development terminals.
Post reply on HN