4 ms·

How does this compare to alacritty?

• vortico 8y ago
  Very similar. Kitty has scrollback. Alacritty handles double/triple-click and drag correctly, although I think kitty may have fixed thia recently, making it king.
• the_duke 8y ago
  Alacritty is quite buggy and not very maintained, the author doesn't put a lot of work in except the occasional small merge. (They still haven't finished the scrollback support branch that's been open for ages). I've switched to kitty and am much happier.
  • beefsack 8y ago
    This is less of an issue if you use a multiplexer like tmux, so how appropriate Alacritty is depends on how you use it.
    • the_duke 8y ago
      True. I use i3 (a tiling WM) though, so tmux is redundant for me unless I work on remote machines. And I really don't want tmux running on top just for scrolling. It hurts performance quite a bit.
      • nobleach 8y ago
        Add the fact that copy/paste into/out of vim gets a little more annoying. (not impossible, just more annoying)
    • sime2009 8y ago
      The big idea of Alacritty is that it uses the GPU for superfast rendering and updates. But relying on tmux for scrolling seems to be a case of "penny wise and pound foolish". Having to round trip key presses and updates through a separate and possibly remote process (tmux) just to do scrolling, introduces a bunch of latency. "Normal" emulators with built in scrolling don't have this problem. Scrolling is purely local operation.
      • JdeBP 8y ago
        It's not for scrolling, it is for scrollback.
        • sime2009 8y ago
          You are right. Replace 'scrolling' with 'scrollback' when you read my comment. :)
  • mseri 8y ago
    Is it? I have been using the scrollback branch for months without problems (although not on mac)
    • the_duke 8y ago
      Even on master I've just felt alacritty being a bit glitchy with regular rendering issues. Especially when switching to full screen, which I do quite regularly. Also kitty definitely feels snappier to me in terms of latency.