3 ms·
- Not sure if it's still the case in most recent versions, but apparently w3m used to be snappier (I suspect there is some blocking still happening in eww, or m
by defanor 6y ago
- Not sure if it's still the case in most recent versions, but apparently w3m used to be snappier (I suspect there is some blocking still happening in eww, or maybe it's just that it loads emacs/elisp more).
- w3m just ignores colours, while eww applies the ones it recognizes, though in newer versions it can be disabled (it seemed like a major misfeature to me, but YMMV, and it's not that relevant anymore).
- Being written in elisp, eww is more hackable and generally fits a bit better into emacs.
Both render reasonable HTML subsets fine, can load images and handle forms.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago> it seemed like a major misfeature to me Webpage-provided colors may not play well with the color scheme you're using (AFAIR, eww doesn't "reset" to black-on-white, but keeps your current color theme for things not explicitly styled), and may cause problems on the terminal (e.g. with low-contrast text getting rounded off to the color of its background). So the ability to disable styling is useful.
- defanor 6y agoIndeed, that's what I meant: the colourisation seemed like a misfeature to me, while the newly added ability to disable colours resolved it. Probably didn't state it quite clearly above.
- nanna 6y ago> w3m just ignores colours, while eww applies the ones it recognizes, though in newer versions it can be disabled Agreed! And to do so: (setq shr-use-colors nil) Edit: Colors in eww come from the Simple HTML Renderer (shr.el), so you need to disable its respective variable.