Live data from Hacker News

Building a TUI is easy now

hatchet.run

131–140 of 262 posts

Re: Building a TUI is easy now

#131

"Creating garbage is easy now." It runs poorly, loses keystrokes, and easily gets bogged down with too much terminal input. I don't want candy coated monospace ASCII graphics. I want something fast and functional. The graphics are _entirely_ secondary. You've missed the point of what a TUI is.

Terminals still have poor keyboard support these days, starting with the Escape key (which should not be ASCII 27 IMO) and various ctrl/shift/alt... key combinations.

Re: Building a TUI is easy now

#132
post #48

I think TUIs-that-want-to-be-GUIs (as opposed to terminal commands just outputting plain text) are sad. Mainly because they’re largely inaccessible. They flatten the structure of a UI under a character stream. You’re forced to use it exactly the way it was designed and no different. Modern GUIs, even web pages too, expose enough structure to the OS to let you use it more freely. I get why people build TUIs, but it’s…

> They flatten the structure of a UI under a character stream

Isn't this ... everything though? Even the browser which you mention as better in the next paragraph.

Re: Building a TUI is easy now

#133
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is how many decades each user of your software would have to use it in order to offset, through the optimisation it provides, the energy consumption you burned through with LLMs.

Would it be that many? Asked AI to do some rough calculation, and it spit that: Making 50 SOTA AI requests per day ≈ running a 10W LED bulb for about 2.5 hours per day Given I usually have 2-3 lights on all day in the house, that's like 1500 LLM requests per day (which sounds quite more than I do). So even a month worth of requests for building some software doesn't sound that much. Having a local beefy traditional b…

> Making 50 SOTA AI requests per day ≈ running a 10W LED bulb for about 2.5 hours per day

This seems remarkably far from what we know. I mean, just to run the data centre aircon will be an order of magnitude greater than that.

Re: Building a TUI is easy now

#134

Looks great. Curious why not choose Rust and do extension of https://ratatui.rs/ ?

Yeah, whenever I hear "Building a TUI is easy now" I imagine someone just discovered ratatui.

There are also other frameworks that make it easy to create TUI eg Textual (in Python) https://textual.textualize.io/

Re: Building a TUI is easy now

#135
post #48

I think TUIs-that-want-to-be-GUIs (as opposed to terminal commands just outputting plain text) are sad. Mainly because they’re largely inaccessible. They flatten the structure of a UI under a character stream. You’re forced to use it exactly the way it was designed and no different. Modern GUIs, even web pages too, expose enough structure to the OS to let you use it more freely. I get why people build TUIs, but it’s…

> You’re forced to use it exactly the way it was designed and no different

So ... Like all Apple products?

Re: Building a TUI is easy now

#136
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would it be that many? Asked AI to do some rough calculation, and it spit that: Making 50 SOTA AI requests per day ≈ running a 10W LED bulb for about 2.5 hours per day Given I usually have 2-3 lights on all day in the house, that's like 1500 LLM requests per day (which sounds quite more than I do). So even a month worth of requests for building some software doesn't sound that much. Having a local beefy traditional b…

Is that true? Because that's indeed FAR less than I thought. That would definitely make me worry a lot less about energy consumption (not that I would go and consume more but not feeling guilty I guess).

A H100 uses about 1000W including networking gear and can generate 80-150 t/s for a 70B model like llama.

So back of the napkin, for a decently sized 1000 token response you’re talking about 8s/3600s*1000 = 2wh which even in California is about $0.001 of electricity.

Re: Building a TUI is easy now

#138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that true? Because that's indeed FAR less than I thought. That would definitely make me worry a lot less about energy consumption (not that I would go and consume more but not feeling guilty I guess).

A H100 uses about 1000W including networking gear and can generate 80-150 t/s for a 70B model like llama. So back of the napkin, for a decently sized 1000 token response you’re talking about 8s/3600s*1000 = 2wh which even in California is about $0.001 of electricity.

With batched parallel requests this scales down further. Even a MacBook M3 on battery power can do inference quickly and efficiently. Large scale training is the power hog.

Re: Building a TUI is easy now

#139

The problem with TUI's, that we have all Stockholm syndrom'd ourselves, is that I can't use the mouse cursor to click to the position on the screen and edit the command line.

Emacs vterm can do this. It's the only terminal emulator I'm aware of that can, because it seems nobody else cares. It can even backspace and delete all the text selected.

Re: Building a TUI is easy now

#140
post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are GUIs --- just minecraft GUIs. One day, we will rediscover why GUI toolkits exist. The only real advantage TUIs have over GUIs is easy remoting, TBH. Maybe that's enough for people. Otherwise? They're just hair shirts.

I've use Claude to make myself a number of little tools and weird apps that only I would want lately. They need to be cross-platform between Linux and Mac and sometimes Windows. The best approaches I've found are Tauri (+Svelte for making layout easier) for lightweight GUIs but for anything more complex I prefer a TUI. The Ratatui framework works very well. A TUI feels like a "real" app as opposed to a glorified webp…

> A TUI feels like a "real" app as opposed to a glorified webpage.

Huh? "Feels"? Plenty of Electron/Tauri apps feel perfectly normal. Like I've been saying, the TUI craze is just a fad.

Post reply on HN