211–220 of 703 posts
Interesting the decision[1] of building against glibc instead of musl. Any reason for not using musl instead (and doing a static binary)? This would avoid the compatibility issues e.g.: Alpine and Nix. [1]: https://zed.dev/docs/linux
Man, I'm conflicted. I mean, Zed works pretty damn well. So far my biggest annoyance with Zed though is that it's constantly trying to download language servers and other tools and run them. And sure, that's handy, but 1. I don't really want it, I'd much rather only use distribution-provided tools. 2. It doesn't work at all on NixOS, so it's just wasting its time and our bandwidth constantly downloading and trying to…
NixOS is listed here: https://zed.dev/docs/linux
For me, works as expected.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I sympathize with the situation that Zed developers are in. They are thinking of the user experience first and foremost, and when trying to distribute on Linux, faced with an overgrown, chaotic landscape that utterly fails to provide the basic needs of application developers, such as the ability to distribute a binary that has no dependencies on any one particular distribution and can open a window and interact wit…
The best part of Linux’s single universal packaging system is there’s three of them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to my knowledge, outside of whatever Debian comes with. Keep in mind this was on a Chromebook - so it would have been running in a VM on a rather memory restricted system. That said, VSCode would have been running in the same parameters. Just found the file. 42MB on a single line. Takes 5 seconds to open in vim, and about 3 seconds for the right arrow to move the cursor one char over. Nothing like gedit, but slow…
Just curious, what of you do the same with bare neovim, for science?
$ time vim tt.json
real 0m5.910s user 0m4.120s sys 0m0.343s
$ time nvim tt.json
real 0m2.894s user 0m1.372s sys 0m0.292s
Just a suggestion. One of the best features of pure text editors (and incredible, not all of them implement it) is autosave keeping the "unsaved" state of the file. For example, if you make some changes in a file (new or not), don't save the changes, close and open the editor, the state of the opened files are kept like I never had closed the editor. The unsaved files are still unsaved. New edited files are still the…
Is this if you close the entire editor? If you just close the file, do the changes remain next time you open it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you run xeyes and the eyes follow your cursor when it's above the application you want to test, it's running under xwayland. If they don't follow your cursor, the application is running under native Wayland.
finally a use for xeyes?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best part of Linux’s single universal packaging system is there’s three of them.
Sure, but all of them are actually universal, so it doesn't matter which one you choose, unlike their being multiple regular package formats.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think people just have very different tolerances for latency and slowness. I keep trying different editors (including VS Code), and I always end up going back to Neovim because everything else just feels sluggish, to the point where it annoys me so much I'm willing to put up with all the configuration burden of Neovim because of it. I tried out Zed and it actually feels fast enough for me to consider switching.
Sublime Text 3 is still one of my favorite editors. I use VSCode lately because of its excellent "Remote SSH" integration - but when it comes to latency sublime has it beat. Zed does not feel fast on my machine, which is a 13900K/128gb ram. It is running in xwayland though, so that could be part of the problem. It feels identical to vscode.
My ideal editor would probably be something like a variation on Sublime Text that's modeled more closely after TextMate while keeping the bits that make Sublime better (like the command palette).
Really dislike the one line installer. How is it installing? Flatpak? Adding an apt repo? Manual install? Fortunately docs go into better detail, https://zed.dev/docs/linux I'm on Debian anyway so who am I kidding expecting this to be in apt :D
Pipe the script to cat before you pipe it to sh and take a look. It's downloading an executable to ~/.local/bin. If that's not your preference, there are many other options for obtaining the software, via your distribution or manually. I feel the backlash to this pattern is pretty overblown. They're not attempting to hide anything, just make the common case convenient.
First, Zed found to allow silent (non-consented) background binary downloads [0]
Now, launching on Linux.
Both of which are big news in its own right.