3 ms·

> Sadly Kitty is very bare-bones. Care to elaborate? I had an impression that it's a pretty complete piece of software. I've been driving it daily for more t

> Sadly Kitty is very bare-bones. Care to elaborate? I had an impression that it's a pretty complete piece of software. I've been driving it daily for more than 1½ years, and I'm pretty happy with it.

IshKebab 3y ago
Well the first two things I tried that are present in pretty much all software - scroll bar and Ctrl-F to find, did not exist. There's no menu bar at all in fact.
- mbork_pl 3y ago
  > scroll bar I didn't even realize, I don't see a need for it anyway. > Ctrl-F to find, did not exist That's because Kitty has something much better: > Sometimes you need to explore the scrollback buffer in more detail, maybe search for some text or refer to it side-by-side while typing in a follow-up command. kitty allows you to do this by pressing the ctrl+shift+h shortcut, which will open the scrollback buffer in your favorite pager program (which is less by default). > There's no menu bar at all in fact. Which is a big plus. Emacs has a menu bar (and a toolbar), and I obviously turn them off, because they take up screen real estate.
  - IshKebab 3y ago
    > ctrl-shift-h Ah yes, the logical shortcut for "find" (enormous face palm). Why do so many open source devs find sane UX so hard? It's a bit weird. (And yes I know it isn't exactly the same as "find" - it that is your instinctive response then you're misunderstanding how UX works.)
    - aumerle 3y ago
      That shortcut opens HISTORY, hence it is ctrl+shift+H. And if the terminal emulator used up ctrl+f to implement find, it would mean that no terminal program could use ctrl+f to implement find. Maybe next time before you try to imply other people dont know UX, pause, and consider if you know what you are talking about. Incidentally, using the term UX itself, generally is a good signal that the person that is using it doesnt have a clue what they are talking about.
      - IshKebab 3y ago
        > And if the terminal emulator used up ctrl+f to implement find, it would mean that no terminal program could use ctrl+f to implement find. Gnome Terminal sensible uses Ctrl+Shift+F to get around this. Kitty... does not. > Incidentally, using the term UX itself, generally is a good signal that the person that is using it doesnt have a clue what they are talking about. Of course you think that.
        aumerle 3y ago
        And ctrl+shift+f is the same as ctrl+f for you? The point of using "identical" keybindings is to ease discoverability across programs. ctrl+shift+f and ctrl+f are not identical and therefore there is no point to doing that. And pretty much anyone that has to deal with internet commenters using the term UX thinks that, not just me.
        IshKebab 3y ago
        Ctrl+Shift+F is commonly "find in all files" so it's a logical shortcut to try. In addition, adding Shift to a shortcut to get around this exact problem is also common. For example Ctrl+Shift+C/V are common copy/paste shortcuts in terminal emulators on Linux.

IshKebab 3y ago

Well the first two things I tried that are present in pretty much all software - scroll bar and Ctrl-F to find, did not exist. There's no menu bar at all in fact.

mbork_pl 3y ago
> scroll bar I didn't even realize, I don't see a need for it anyway. > Ctrl-F to find, did not exist That's because Kitty has something much better: > Sometimes you need to explore the scrollback buffer in more detail, maybe search for some text or refer to it side-by-side while typing in a follow-up command. kitty allows you to do this by pressing the ctrl+shift+h shortcut, which will open the scrollback buffer in your favorite pager program (which is less by default). > There's no menu bar at all in fact. Which is a big plus. Emacs has a menu bar (and a toolbar), and I obviously turn them off, because they take up screen real estate.
- IshKebab 3y ago
  > ctrl-shift-h Ah yes, the logical shortcut for "find" (enormous face palm). Why do so many open source devs find sane UX so hard? It's a bit weird. (And yes I know it isn't exactly the same as "find" - it that is your instinctive response then you're misunderstanding how UX works.)
  - aumerle 3y ago
    That shortcut opens HISTORY, hence it is ctrl+shift+H. And if the terminal emulator used up ctrl+f to implement find, it would mean that no terminal program could use ctrl+f to implement find. Maybe next time before you try to imply other people dont know UX, pause, and consider if you know what you are talking about. Incidentally, using the term UX itself, generally is a good signal that the person that is using it doesnt have a clue what they are talking about.
    - IshKebab 3y ago
      > And if the terminal emulator used up ctrl+f to implement find, it would mean that no terminal program could use ctrl+f to implement find. Gnome Terminal sensible uses Ctrl+Shift+F to get around this. Kitty... does not. > Incidentally, using the term UX itself, generally is a good signal that the person that is using it doesnt have a clue what they are talking about. Of course you think that.
      - aumerle 3y ago
        And ctrl+shift+f is the same as ctrl+f for you? The point of using "identical" keybindings is to ease discoverability across programs. ctrl+shift+f and ctrl+f are not identical and therefore there is no point to doing that. And pretty much anyone that has to deal with internet commenters using the term UX thinks that, not just me.
        IshKebab 3y ago
        Ctrl+Shift+F is commonly "find in all files" so it's a logical shortcut to try. In addition, adding Shift to a shortcut to get around this exact problem is also common. For example Ctrl+Shift+C/V are common copy/paste shortcuts in terminal emulators on Linux.