5 ms·

> I could spend hours figuring out all those things, This post is explaining how to set up those things. Less than five minutes to read.

namuol 9mo ago
> Less than five minutes to read. OMZ is still easier to set up consistently. That’s why we use it. If the concern is the bloat of OMZ then make FMZ - fast my zsh - that is just as quick to set up and doesn’t add “bloat”?
- do_not_redeem 9mo ago
  I won't spoil the article, but if you read to the end you'll find out what this "FMZ" project is called.
  - Liquid_Fire 9mo ago
    Can you spoil it for me, because I read it to the end and saw no mention of such a project. Unless you are referring to the DIY approach the article suggests.
    - einsteinx2 9mo ago
      Somewhere else in the comment thread Zim (zimfw) was mentioned which after reading their website sounds pretty much like that.
SkyPuncher 9mo ago
That misses the point. I don’t even want to think about any of that stuff. It’s a single command to install oh-my-zsh. I can fire it off, check Slack, and come back in 5 minutes. If I have to take 5 minutes to setup it up, I’m just not going to do it.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- MeetingsBrowser 9mo ago
  Caring enough to read a blog post and comment on hackernews, but not enough to copy/paste the changes from the blog post is a very fine line.
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  - SkyPuncher 9mo ago
    Not sure what your point argument is.
    - darkwater 9mo ago
      Their point is that what you complain about as "time consuming" is not time consuming at all and that you consumed more time reading the post and commenting on HN that actually installing starship. In your defense I must say I installed starship ages ago but still not migrated to it from powerline-go because I'm lazy.
  - subsection1h 9mo ago
    [flagged]
  - happytoexplain 9mo ago
    This is common low-quality internet arguing ("you care enough to come into this thread but..."). You can avoid this by keeping in mind that different things are different things, and analogies have many holes by default.
- subsection1h 9mo ago
  [flagged]
  - 9mo ago
g947o 9mo ago
Less than five minutes to read but how long to set up my own? The author only showed what he needs/prefers ("Here is my config for starship"). I'll need to navigate the documentation of starship to figure out all those options, which defeats the purpose. Their config documentation (https://starship.rs/config/ https://starship.rs/config/) already gives me headaches. And from the article > Because cloud services are available globally, I've disabled them. That's some bad defaults right there. > When you run a command, it also shows how long it took to execute. No I absolutely don't want this thing done by the author. Now I am fully in the "customize my config" territory. Also, most of us are unlike the author, and 0.07s vs 0.38s startup time means no difference. I think the point of the previous comment has been more than clear enough.
- bostik 9mo ago
  > Also, most of us are unlike the author, and 0.07s vs 0.38s startup time means no difference. That's quite likely a workflow thing. If you are popping up new (transient) terminals frequently, then a ~400ms wait time for each adds up and makes the entire machine feel really slow. I'm willing to wait extra half a second for a new terminal -- once -- after I've changed my autocompletion configs (rebuild + rehash takes a while), but if I had to wait for that long every time I hit Win+enter and wait for the terminal to become active, I'd be irritated pretty damn quickly too. You get conditioned to immediate responses pretty fast.

namuol 9mo ago

> Less than five minutes to read. OMZ is still easier to set up consistently. That’s why we use it. If the concern is the bloat of OMZ then make FMZ - fast my zsh - that is just as quick to set up and doesn’t add “bloat”?

do_not_redeem 9mo ago
I won't spoil the article, but if you read to the end you'll find out what this "FMZ" project is called.
- Liquid_Fire 9mo ago
  Can you spoil it for me, because I read it to the end and saw no mention of such a project. Unless you are referring to the DIY approach the article suggests.
  - einsteinx2 9mo ago
    Somewhere else in the comment thread Zim (zimfw) was mentioned which after reading their website sounds pretty much like that.

SkyPuncher 9mo ago

That misses the point. I don’t even want to think about any of that stuff. It’s a single command to install oh-my-zsh. I can fire it off, check Slack, and come back in 5 minutes. If I have to take 5 minutes to setup it up, I’m just not going to do it.

deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
MeetingsBrowser 9mo ago
Caring enough to read a blog post and comment on hackernews, but not enough to copy/paste the changes from the blog post is a very fine line.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- SkyPuncher 9mo ago
  Not sure what your point argument is.
  - darkwater 9mo ago
    Their point is that what you complain about as "time consuming" is not time consuming at all and that you consumed more time reading the post and commenting on HN that actually installing starship. In your defense I must say I installed starship ages ago but still not migrated to it from powerline-go because I'm lazy.
- subsection1h 9mo ago
  [flagged]
- happytoexplain 9mo ago
  This is common low-quality internet arguing ("you care enough to come into this thread but..."). You can avoid this by keeping in mind that different things are different things, and analogies have many holes by default.
subsection1h 9mo ago
[flagged]
- 9mo ago

g947o 9mo ago

Less than five minutes to read but how long to set up my own? The author only showed what he needs/prefers ("Here is my config for starship"). I'll need to navigate the documentation of starship to figure out all those options, which defeats the purpose. Their config documentation (https://starship.rs/config/ https://starship.rs/config/) already gives me headaches. And from the article > Because cloud services are available globally, I've disabled them. That's some bad defaults right there. > When you run a command, it also shows how long it took to execute. No I absolutely don't want this thing done by the author. Now I am fully in the "customize my config" territory. Also, most of us are unlike the author, and 0.07s vs 0.38s startup time means no difference. I think the point of the previous comment has been more than clear enough.

bostik 9mo ago
> Also, most of us are unlike the author, and 0.07s vs 0.38s startup time means no difference. That's quite likely a workflow thing. If you are popping up new (transient) terminals frequently, then a ~400ms wait time for each adds up and makes the entire machine feel really slow. I'm willing to wait extra half a second for a new terminal -- once -- after I've changed my autocompletion configs (rebuild + rehash takes a while), but if I had to wait for that long every time I hit Win+enter and wait for the terminal to become active, I'd be irritated pretty damn quickly too. You get conditioned to immediate responses pretty fast.