5 ms·

It’s not a Windows/Mac thing. There are definitely slow terminal emulators for Linux as well. I’m quite sure you wouldn’t want xterm as your daily driver.

by cpach 3y ago

kristopolous 3y ago
I use exactly that. It's fine for me and I'm very much a terminal first person. Maybe people have extremely fancy shell setups? Perhaps it's a font thing that slows it down? Can you demonstrate? I'm usual a tmux/zsh/vim user (although I've promised to switch to emacs for years :( ) I just timed my xterm. I'm displaying about 2.3MB/s of characters. Basically here was my test $ dd if=/dev/urandom bs=10M count=1 | hexdump -C > /tmp/test $ ls -l /tmp/test -rw-r--r-- 1 chris chris 51773449 Oct 8 09:32 /tmp/test $ time cat /tmp/test ... wait wait wait .... 51773449 / (total time) / (2^20) Now this of course depends on the size of the window. I'm on a 4320x3840 dual 4k monitor and the window geometry was 1334x928 for this test. I acknowledge this computer (i7-8650U ~ 2018 thinkpad with a boring UHD Graphics 620) is capable of faster output but the xterm featureset is vaaassstt (albeit extremely complicated) and I've found the other terminals to be lacking. My only faithless move away from xterm was probably 17 or so years ago with rxvt when I was on a laptop with ballpark 16MB of memory. It's memory footprint and startup time was way smaller probably for its total lack of features and unicode support. That made a difference on my Toshiba Protege 120mhz pentium I was using at the time. When I was a macOS and a Windows developer, slow terminals were definitely a problem though
- slotrans 3y ago
  2MB/s is glacial. Your computer is very fast, it should be able to print over 1GB/s without breaking a sweat. Casey Muratori demonstrated this with his refterm project. It seems like a lot of interest in making fast terminals has followed from that.
  - kristopolous 3y ago
    Why do I care? I can't read things that fast This isn't rhetorical. I can't answer the question
  - trapnii 3y ago
    To be honest, refterm was a bad idea to begin with. It's not a terminal, and it eventually also stated that in its README.md. Not to mention, that you - by definition - can't compare apples with pies. refterm is not a terminal and thus cannot be compared with a terminal WRT speed. It simply prove a point on rendering speed, at a cost of breaking a lot of the rules a terminal emulator has to obey to. Most notably is `DECAWM` (DEC Auto-Wrap Mode) that was not properly implemented. The author once stated in a Twitch stream that he simply didn't understand that and thus skipped that part. However, that is the part where it will get complex (and thus slow) if you want to get it right for non-trivial US-ASCII characters, such as complex grapheme clusters (family Emoji most interestingly) or even VS16 (variation selector changing the width of the base code point from narrow to wide). The latter point isn't standardized by DEC anyways, but the younger terminals all try to make the terminal more appealing to the younger Unicode crowd that do expect complex Unicode to render "just fine" (or "as fine as it gets"). refterm also had a hard coded 4k line length limit and just hard-cut off there instead of properly counting for the wrap. TL;DR refterm (while positively inspirational to a few) was harmful to the terminal community, because it was fooling a lot of people with false metrics that the users simply believed in, without questioning.
SoftTalker 3y ago
I use xterm. Seems fine. Not sure what I'm missing I guess but I get my work done.

It’s not a Windows/Mac thing. There are definitely slow terminal emulators for Linux as well. I’m quite sure you wouldn’t want xterm as your daily driver.

by cpach 3y ago

It’s not a Windows/Mac thing. There are definitely slow terminal emulators for Linux as well. I’m quite sure you wouldn’t want xterm as your daily driver.

kristopolous 3y ago

I use exactly that. It's fine for me and I'm very much a terminal first person. Maybe people have extremely fancy shell setups? Perhaps it's a font thing that slows it down? Can you demonstrate? I'm usual a tmux/zsh/vim user (although I've promised to switch to emacs for years :( ) I just timed my xterm. I'm displaying about 2.3MB/s of characters. Basically here was my test $ dd if=/dev/urandom bs=10M count=1 | hexdump -C > /tmp/test $ ls -l /tmp/test -rw-r--r-- 1 chris chris 51773449 Oct 8 09:32 /tmp/test $ time cat /tmp/test ... wait wait wait .... 51773449 / (total time) / (2^20) Now this of course depends on the size of the window. I'm on a 4320x3840 dual 4k monitor and the window geometry was 1334x928 for this test. I acknowledge this computer (i7-8650U ~ 2018 thinkpad with a boring UHD Graphics 620) is capable of faster output but the xterm featureset is vaaassstt (albeit extremely complicated) and I've found the other terminals to be lacking. My only faithless move away from xterm was probably 17 or so years ago with rxvt when I was on a laptop with ballpark 16MB of memory. It's memory footprint and startup time was way smaller probably for its total lack of features and unicode support. That made a difference on my Toshiba Protege 120mhz pentium I was using at the time. When I was a macOS and a Windows developer, slow terminals were definitely a problem though

slotrans 3y ago
2MB/s is glacial. Your computer is very fast, it should be able to print over 1GB/s without breaking a sweat. Casey Muratori demonstrated this with his refterm project. It seems like a lot of interest in making fast terminals has followed from that.
- kristopolous 3y ago
  Why do I care? I can't read things that fast This isn't rhetorical. I can't answer the question
- trapnii 3y ago
  To be honest, refterm was a bad idea to begin with. It's not a terminal, and it eventually also stated that in its README.md. Not to mention, that you - by definition - can't compare apples with pies. refterm is not a terminal and thus cannot be compared with a terminal WRT speed. It simply prove a point on rendering speed, at a cost of breaking a lot of the rules a terminal emulator has to obey to. Most notably is `DECAWM` (DEC Auto-Wrap Mode) that was not properly implemented. The author once stated in a Twitch stream that he simply didn't understand that and thus skipped that part. However, that is the part where it will get complex (and thus slow) if you want to get it right for non-trivial US-ASCII characters, such as complex grapheme clusters (family Emoji most interestingly) or even VS16 (variation selector changing the width of the base code point from narrow to wide). The latter point isn't standardized by DEC anyways, but the younger terminals all try to make the terminal more appealing to the younger Unicode crowd that do expect complex Unicode to render "just fine" (or "as fine as it gets"). refterm also had a hard coded 4k line length limit and just hard-cut off there instead of properly counting for the wrap. TL;DR refterm (while positively inspirational to a few) was harmful to the terminal community, because it was fooling a lot of people with false metrics that the users simply believed in, without questioning.

SoftTalker 3y ago

I use xterm. Seems fine. Not sure what I'm missing I guess but I get my work done.