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

Linux When?

zed.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 169 posts

Re: Linux When?

#71

Post by jethro_tell »

MR4D wrote: post #45
jonhohle wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or… use one of the existing cross platform toolkits that have existed for decades. Text Editors, traditionally, did not require shaders to run or be performant, and not require entire systems worth of RAM.

Out of curiosity, how many of them run at 120 FPS? (honest question - I've never looked into it myself)

Honest question. What could you possibly do with a text editor at 120 fps that you can't do at 15 or 30?

I can't think or type that fast and I can't read scroll back that fast either so I can't wrap my head around needing something like that.

Re: Linux When?

#72

Post by cpuguy83 »

eikenberry wrote: post #38

If Apple had just adopted the Vulkan standard instead of going off with their own proprietary graphics API this would have been a non-issue. Smacks of Canonical and their repeatedly doing one thing while ignoring the rest of the community standardizing on something else.

Metal predates Vulkan. But also I'm pretty sure Apple doesn't care if an app is portable.

Re: Linux When?

#73

Post by forgotpwd16 »

freqmod wrote: post #66
forgotpwd16 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the first time I see FPS mentioned for a text editor. Is this something that matters or just an pointless metric utilized as selling point?

Fps in itself is not important, but it is a substitute for input latency, and if your keystrokes start lagging it feels sluggish. At least historically electron based editors (like atom) has been feeling significantly more sluggish than sublime text or vim with a decent terminal emulator.

For terminal emulators comparisons at least the metrics used are latency and throughput. Now those plus times to do operations (load file, search & replace, etc) wouldn't surprise me to be the comparison metrics for text editors. FPS though feels weird.

Re: Linux When?

#74

Post by metabagel »

Longhanks wrote: post #44
riffic wrote: post #40

am I supposed to know what zed is?

Why bother commenting instead of clicking the link and in the main navigation bar pressing the very clearly visible "ABOUT" button?

In all fairness, and I already knew what Zed was, the About page is a long read to find out anything more than that Zed is an editor. (As in, it says right away that they are building an editor, but then there is a long-winded discussion about history, goals, etc.)

Re: Linux When?

#75

Post by mikaylamaki »

NoraCodes wrote: post #65

One question I don't think this post answers - why not use `winit`?

Simply put: historical artifact and we want to own the stack. Zed was first created when these abstractions where a lot younger, and a text editor needs certain features, like IME support, that weren't as common back then. Further, owning the stack we're built on gives us the flexibility to change the framework whenever and however we want, which we value more than the additional work it takes to re-implement things ourselves.

Re: Linux When?

#76

Post by metabagel »

pythonaut_16 wrote: post #3
JohnKemeny wrote: post #2

[flagged]

It's a blog post directly on their website. Is it really unreasonable to need to click to the home page for more context?

At the time you posted this comment, there was no link to the home page for mobile devices. Also, on mobile devices it's a pain to edit the URL in the address bar. You could have gone to the About page, but there's no summary. You'd gather right away that this was about an editor, but you'd have to read quite a bit about history, goals, etc. before you find out what differentiates this editor from any other editor.

Re: Linux When?

#77

Post by NekkoDroid »

SomeRndName11 wrote: post #57
forgotpwd16 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the first time I see FPS mentioned for a text editor. Is this something that matters or just an pointless metric utilized as selling point?

Well it may have effect on ergonomics. Some people claim they cannot use 60Hz monitor after trying 144hz.

Well, that is usually refering to some form of "simulated fluid motion", not new characters appearing and disappearing. The only case where that kinda fluid motion would matter is when you have text scrolling by at semi-fast speeds.

Re: Linux When?

#78

Post by sunshowers »

forgotpwd16 wrote: post #53
MR4D wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, how many of them run at 120 FPS? (honest question - I've never looked into it myself)

This is the first time I see FPS mentioned for a text editor. Is this something that matters or just an pointless metric utilized as selling point?

As far as I can tell, graphics pipelines often use frame buffering. The quicker the next frame can be drawn, the faster it feels.

Re: Linux When?

#79

Post by ajross »

jethro_tell wrote: post #71
MR4D wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, how many of them run at 120 FPS? (honest question - I've never looked into it myself)

Honest question. What could you possibly do with a text editor at 120 fps that you can't do at 15 or 30? I can't think or type that fast and I can't read scroll back that fast either so I can't wrap my head around needing something like that.

> Honest question. What could you possibly do with a text editor at 120 fps that you can't do at 15 or 30?

More-honest-than-it-should-be answer: sell a product to Apple-ecosystem developers trying desperately to find something to justify the $3k they want to spend on a new MBP.

(Typing this very comment in emacs running out of the Linux VM on a mid-range chromebook attached to a 30 Hz 4k television, btw. Come at me, as it were.)

Re: Linux When?

#80

Post by thfuran »

m463 wrote: post #46
nemomarx wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose ideally you'd want it to be written on Linux first, if you're that kinda person - but the market is probably on Mac?

I remember reading a long time ago (think pre-intel macs) that game developers never developed for macs. However if they did, the games would sell because the mac people wanted games and there were so few available they would buy anything. problems of a closed ecosystem.

Circa 2000, a lot of big name games actually were released for Mac. Heroes III, StarCraft, and Diablo II, for example, all got Mac releases.
Post reply on HN