31–40 of 462 posts
https://github.com/marler8997/zigx
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPWFLkHRIAQ
Compared to libX11, it avoids dynamic dependencies, uses less memory, and provides better error messages.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a really really bad comment. I've never heard of the framework you're talking about and I thought you were talking about the Firefox prototype.
If you’re in software dev or frequent hn, how have you not heard of Phoenix? It is consistently voted as most loved web framework.
This is a great project! I like and use Wayland but the portal protocols and extension mechanism does leave a lot to be desired. Wayland is still quite a way behind Windows and macOS in terms of what productivity users need An X11 rewrite with some security baked in is an awesome approach. Will be watching!
If you took people who absolutely never tried any computing, and gave them macos, windows, and for example Plasma, they would NOT consider windows or macos to be ready for the desktop. If you go 15 years back, even way more so.
even in the early 2000s, windows was so hilariously crappy that you had to make floppy disks to even get to install the thing. If PCs didnt come preloaded with windows, regular users would never ever be able to install it, versus the relative ease a typical linux distribution was to install. This is also one of the large reasons that when their windows slowed down due to being a piece of shit with 1000000 toolbars, people threw it out and bought a new, despite the fact that a reinstall would have solved it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought for a long time that rather than move to Wayland, we could come up with a tidied-up version of X. Sounds like a good and useful project, I hope it progresses.
I thought this too and originally thought that’s what Wayland was going to do but it went off and did its own thing. I’m all for an X12.
If you take the time to read through that (very partial) list of cruft and footguns in X11 it probably makes it a little easier to understand why a clean-slate approach was able to attract momentum and why many hands-on involved developers were relatively tired of X11. Critics would of course respond that backwards compatibility is worth the effort and rewrites are often the wrong call, etc. It's the Python 2/3 debate and many others.
Pretty interesting approach to make an X server that is essentially "Wayland-like" (merging display server/compositor by default, isolated apps by default, no remoting of GLX, dropping legacy protocol features to the point of breaking compat with the core protocol, etc.). Not sure who this is for, but by itself it looks like a fairly reasonable set of choices.
For people who absolutely have to have X11 this looks like a better plan than XLibre.
> The compositor will get disabled … if the client runs a fullscreen application and disabled vsync in the application. This is interesting to me, why would vsync being enabled mean that the desktop compositor needs to stick around for a full screen app?
I imagine because vsync and triple buffering introduce latency. There are cases like games where you don't want all that lag.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For people who absolutely have to have X11 this looks like a better plan than XLibre.
People who want to use X11 are likely to be the same people using older software and hardware, which this doesn't support.