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

Fucking Color Picker

tonymccoy.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 140 posts

Re: Fucking Color Picker

#41

Post by theon144 »

phiresky wrote: post #34
stephc_int13 wrote: post #10

Wow, this is waaaay too big for my taste. I'm absolutely sure it is possible to write the same cross-platform app for less than 500KBytes and no dependencies.

Yes, this 450 line program could have been written in whatever native language you want with probably 3x the code and time spent, but why would you? Developer time has been more expensive than hardware for a decade now. Everyone here loves to virtue signal about how horrible programs that take 0.01% of the space of a normal SSD and 1% of the RAM are, but the fact is that it does not matter at all, and you wouldn't ev…

Ah yes, the good ol' "Efficiency doesn't matter on my hardware in my situation" argument. Brought to you by the same culture that ends up with devs being surprised most of their users in fact don't have 8-core 32G machines with 4k screens, unlike all of their colleagues and immediate peers.

For that matter, I did notice the size, as I'm browsing on a mobile connection (travelling) and the 55M color picker utility would take a bit over 2 minutes to download.

Re: Fucking Color Picker

#43

Post by laichzeit0 »

mizaru wrote: post #3
pooya72 wrote: post #2

I know some people think Electron is cancer[1], but it is the fastest way to write cross-platform applications. I've been trying to learn to make apps for macOS, and it feels like even Apple doesn't want me write apps for the Mac. [1]: https://medium.com/commitlog/electron-is-cancer-b066108e6c32

128 MB for something that should be a couple hundred KB at best? Yes, it is cancer.

Provide an alternative to the cancer that has every single advantage of Electron.

Re: Fucking Color Picker

#45

Post by rhodysurf »

pooya72 wrote: post #28
nieksand wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it actually faster to develop in Electron than with QT and C++? It has been over a decade, but I remember it being both straight-forward and pleasant to support Linux, Windows, and MacOS. I vaguely recall supporting Solaris too.

That's a good comparison, and I think I should qualify my statement. It's the fastest way to develop cross-platform apps when you already know web development. I've only done some trivial apps with QT and Python, and it was pretty straight forward. The UI didn't look as nice as it does with Electron. I'd be interested to hear someone's opinion who has real experience with both. edit: u/781 has some experience with bo…

You can style the Qt GUI same as you would style the electron GUI so that’s a false equivalence kinda

Re: Fucking Color Picker

#46

Post by 781 »

nieksand wrote: post #13
pooya72 wrote: post #2

I know some people think Electron is cancer[1], but it is the fastest way to write cross-platform applications. I've been trying to learn to make apps for macOS, and it feels like even Apple doesn't want me write apps for the Mac. [1]: https://medium.com/commitlog/electron-is-cancer-b066108e6c32

Is it actually faster to develop in Electron than with QT and C++? It has been over a decade, but I remember it being both straight-forward and pleasant to support Linux, Windows, and MacOS. I vaguely recall supporting Solaris too.

As someone who wrote GUI apps in most of the frameworks, starting with raw Win32 and MFC, yes, doing a GUI in Electron is massively faster, especially if you use modern frameworks like Vue or React.

Re: Fucking Color Picker

#48

Post by tenryuu »

phiresky wrote: post #34
stephc_int13 wrote: post #10

Wow, this is waaaay too big for my taste. I'm absolutely sure it is possible to write the same cross-platform app for less than 500KBytes and no dependencies.

Yes, this 450 line program could have been written in whatever native language you want with probably 3x the code and time spent, but why would you? Developer time has been more expensive than hardware for a decade now. Everyone here loves to virtue signal about how horrible programs that take 0.01% of the space of a normal SSD and 1% of the RAM are, but the fact is that it does not matter at all, and you wouldn't ev…

We choose to code so people with lower spec machines should also be able to run the program without having to worry about it running like trash.

Short thread on the matter: https://twitter.com/Wunkolo/status/1091572380315439104

Re: Fucking Color Picker

#49

Post by schoen »

spookylukey wrote: post #30
Drup wrote: post #6

If you wonder about linux: gcolor2 ( http://gcolor2.sourceforge.net/ ) does the job. And for size fetishists: it weights 42KB.

Also, xmag, you already have it installed if you use the X Window System. It's 41kb, extremely lightweight (always starts instantly) and also magnifies a screen portion which is helpful for picking colours.

Something I never realized about xmag is that if you click on a pixel, it tells you that pixel's color as a hex triple.

Re: Fucking Color Picker

#50

Post by misnome »

A dev missed some feature of their usual OS and so wrote a cross platform version open source in their spare time.

Who cares that they used the “wrong” language or framework, or could have solved it another way or “who need this functionality anyway”.

Isn’t this supposed to be what the dev spirit is about?

Post reply on HN