4 ms·

> Slides with exuberant amount of lines or characters produce rendering glitches intentionally to prevent you from holding bad presentations. Welp. That's suck

> Slides with exuberant amount of lines or characters produce rendering glitches intentionally to prevent you from holding bad presentations. Welp. That's suckless for ya. In a 1000 line, minimalist presentation tool, there is logic devoted to screwing up the output if it doesn't conform to some guy's opinion of what a slide should look like. I would say that sucks more, rather than less, than the same tool without the bad attitude. But then it wouldn't be suckless.

renerick 3y ago
I don't think there is "logic" for screwing up the output, more likely the implementation is bugged and they just didn't bother to fix those glitches, and then put it on the page as "feature". At least, I failed to find any relevant code, but I could easily be missing it. And I still would agree, that kind of sucks
- jagged-chisel 3y ago
  Or likely the more content you attempt to add, the harder it is to layout. Rather than add logic to do anything about it, just let the layout logic run rampant.
  - jdiff 3y ago
    Here I thought part of the allure of suckless development was that simple code held less bugs and was more flexible given fewer moving parts.
    - berkes 3y ago
      Why would it not be?
    - jagged-chisel 3y ago
      I don’t know how one could possibly get infinite flexibility and robustness in any case, let alone with simple code and fewer moving parts.
dansalvato 3y ago
"suckless" is a perfect name for this software suite—not because of the name's literal meaning, but because they are advertising their insufferable elitism right on the tin. Yes, building software to solve a limited set of problems can lead to great software. But for god's sake, if your core philosophy is that you're better than everyone else, then you're primarily going to attract developers and users who also think they're better than everyone else. The result is that instead of contributing to a mission that conveys a useful message, you just dig an elitist moat around yourselves that people can't float across unless their egos are so inflated that they're buoyant.
- imiric 3y ago
  > if your core philosophy is that you're better than everyone else, then you're primarily going to attract developers and users who also think they're better than everyone else. That's an unfair characterization. Their philosophy[1] says nothing of the sort. The gist of it is a focus on building software with "simplicity, clarity and frugality" in mind, targeted at "advanced and experienced computer users". There's nothing elitist about that. It's a rejection of the trend of making complex, hard to use and maintain software. Have they gone too far, and end up alienating most users? Perhaps. But people like their software because of their goals and design sensibilities, not because they want to become part of some elite club. That's an old and boring argument people often apply to Unix/Linux users as well. Do better. [1]: https://suckless.org/philosophy/ https://suckless.org/philosophy/
  - dansalvato 3y ago
    I hear you, I regret making such a generalization, and my negatively was uncalled for. Thanks for reminding me to check myself.
  - zockel 3y ago
    > Their philosophy[1] says nothing of the sort Their philosophy doesn't, but their page for dwm[0] does :D "Because dwm is customized through editing its source code, it's pointless to make binary packages of it. This keeps its userbase small and elitist. No novices asking stupid questions. There are some distributions that provide binary packages though." [0] https://dwm.suckless.org/ https://dwm.suckless.org/
nusl 3y ago
So, what? Everything in the world that anyone makes needs to be free of the author’s opinionated way of how to do things or how they like them done? Honestly, just use something else if you care that much about it. Or make your own. But don’t shit all over someone’s work because whatever biases you have aren’t aligned with the author’s project. You are obviously not the target market anyway. It's not like there aren’t valid alternatives, or that this is a captive market. I’m sure Microsoft or Google would love another rounding error to add to their metrics. You get the added benefit of any personal touches, opinions, or human aspects pre-stripped for your enjoyment!
- samatman 3y ago
  > But don’t shit all over someone’s work This is an ironic thing to say in a discussion of suckless.
factormeta 3y ago
I get that it may sucks, but it is better to get an alert message? Or just do the rendering glitches? What is cool about this project is stuff like this. >The presentation is displayed in a simple X11 window colored black on white for maximum contrast even if the sun shines directly onto the projected image. The content of each slide is automatically scaled to fit the window so you don't have to worry about alignment. Instead you can really focus on the content. One can tell the author really had to use this deck in real situations.

renerick 3y ago

I don't think there is "logic" for screwing up the output, more likely the implementation is bugged and they just didn't bother to fix those glitches, and then put it on the page as "feature". At least, I failed to find any relevant code, but I could easily be missing it. And I still would agree, that kind of sucks

jagged-chisel 3y ago
Or likely the more content you attempt to add, the harder it is to layout. Rather than add logic to do anything about it, just let the layout logic run rampant.
- jdiff 3y ago
  Here I thought part of the allure of suckless development was that simple code held less bugs and was more flexible given fewer moving parts.
  - berkes 3y ago
    Why would it not be?
  - jagged-chisel 3y ago
    I don’t know how one could possibly get infinite flexibility and robustness in any case, let alone with simple code and fewer moving parts.

dansalvato 3y ago

"suckless" is a perfect name for this software suite—not because of the name's literal meaning, but because they are advertising their insufferable elitism right on the tin. Yes, building software to solve a limited set of problems can lead to great software. But for god's sake, if your core philosophy is that you're better than everyone else, then you're primarily going to attract developers and users who also think they're better than everyone else. The result is that instead of contributing to a mission that conveys a useful message, you just dig an elitist moat around yourselves that people can't float across unless their egos are so inflated that they're buoyant.

imiric 3y ago
> if your core philosophy is that you're better than everyone else, then you're primarily going to attract developers and users who also think they're better than everyone else. That's an unfair characterization. Their philosophy[1] says nothing of the sort. The gist of it is a focus on building software with "simplicity, clarity and frugality" in mind, targeted at "advanced and experienced computer users". There's nothing elitist about that. It's a rejection of the trend of making complex, hard to use and maintain software. Have they gone too far, and end up alienating most users? Perhaps. But people like their software because of their goals and design sensibilities, not because they want to become part of some elite club. That's an old and boring argument people often apply to Unix/Linux users as well. Do better. [1]: https://suckless.org/philosophy/ https://suckless.org/philosophy/
- dansalvato 3y ago
  I hear you, I regret making such a generalization, and my negatively was uncalled for. Thanks for reminding me to check myself.
- zockel 3y ago
  > Their philosophy[1] says nothing of the sort Their philosophy doesn't, but their page for dwm[0] does :D "Because dwm is customized through editing its source code, it's pointless to make binary packages of it. This keeps its userbase small and elitist. No novices asking stupid questions. There are some distributions that provide binary packages though." [0] https://dwm.suckless.org/ https://dwm.suckless.org/

nusl 3y ago

So, what? Everything in the world that anyone makes needs to be free of the author’s opinionated way of how to do things or how they like them done? Honestly, just use something else if you care that much about it. Or make your own. But don’t shit all over someone’s work because whatever biases you have aren’t aligned with the author’s project. You are obviously not the target market anyway. It's not like there aren’t valid alternatives, or that this is a captive market. I’m sure Microsoft or Google would love another rounding error to add to their metrics. You get the added benefit of any personal touches, opinions, or human aspects pre-stripped for your enjoyment!

samatman 3y ago
> But don’t shit all over someone’s work This is an ironic thing to say in a discussion of suckless.

factormeta 3y ago

I get that it may sucks, but it is better to get an alert message? Or just do the rendering glitches? What is cool about this project is stuff like this. >The presentation is displayed in a simple X11 window colored black on white for maximum contrast even if the sun shines directly onto the projected image. The content of each slide is automatically scaled to fit the window so you don't have to worry about alignment. Instead you can really focus on the content. One can tell the author really had to use this deck in real situations.