3 ms·
when it comes to terminals st (suckless terminal) is superior to anything in speed and features ... it really pays off to invest the time to set it up
by nathias 5y ago
when it comes to terminals st (suckless terminal) is superior to anything in speed and features ... it really pays off to invest the time to set it up
- Karrot_Kream 5y agoIf you have a GPU and use a GPU-rendered terminal, then I'd beg to differ. Kitty is much faster than st especially when I'm tailing fast-moving files. suckless tools are certainly simple, but simple is not always fast. They _can_ be fast due to dispensing with aspects of complexity, but when compared to software that is designed to be fast, they're not as fast. One could argue that suckless tools form a good balance of simplicity, ease of interoperability, and speed that come from their ruthlessly simple perspective, but to say it's globally faster or more feature-rich is heavily overstating the truth.
- nathias 5y agoYea, it depends on the where of the speed, I am using tiling management so I constantly spawn new terminals and most profit from startup speed which for st is almost instantaneous (urxvt was close but slower the rest kitty/alacritty etc. were all slower for starting up).
- pkulak 5y agoI use Alacritty and it spawns new windows as what I would describe as instantly. I'd say I see the window rendered when my finger leaves the key on the keyboard. It may be using a daemon model, I'm not sure. I've been meaning to move to Foot, because it's apparently _even_ faster, but I haven't gotten around to it yet.
- nathias 5y agost starts in ~0.01s
- pkulak 5y agoWhat's your point though? Assuming Alacritty starts in 0.03... is that the reason to use a terminal? Also, how did you measure that? I'm interested to time Alacritty.
- nathias 5y agoI used 'time' to measure, but it doesn't really matter, what matters is how it feels. A 0.03 and 0.01 are the same, but 0.1 feels slow.