3 ms·
Flawed design is still a flaw. I'll accept that it is a design feature to get around another failure mode, and that it might even be preferable sometimes. But
by quesera 4y ago
Flawed design is still a flaw.
I'll accept that it is a design feature to get around another failure mode, and that it might even be preferable sometimes.
But it's a serious flaw. Terminal emulators should never drop output, that's what control flow signaling is for!
- codetrotter 4y agoIt’s not a flaw. It’s a different kind of use-case than you have in mind. It’s fine. No one is telling you to use urxvt. You can continue to use whatever terminal emulator you prefer. That’s the power of choice we have. Different programs that do the same kind of things but in different ways. So there is no reason to insist that urxvt is flawed.
- quesera 4y agoSo, yes this has veered strongly into preferences and semantics. But the job of a terminal emulator is to act as a terminal. Terminals don't drop output in normal operation. That's a failure mode, and maybe it's reasonable or even acceptable. But the output is imperfect. Imperfections are flaws. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything here. Horses for courses, of course. I'm just surprised to learn that any terminal emulator developer decided that "giving up" is OK. I am sure the other options I can think of were also all considered by the developers, but I'm still surprised.