News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Terminal and shell performance by geocar on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @02:45PM (#14799019)
Sometimes it is easy to be faster than everyone else by simply having less code. Sometimes you need to think about how you can do as little as possible instead.

XTerm has the logic for handling partial screen updates and window obscuring other terminals don't bother with because it was written in an era that these weren't mere 10-50msec delays but 100+msec delays; Anyone who used dtterm on a sun IPX knows what I'm talking about

I'm also a Terminal.app user.

Re:Terminal and shell performance by sliken on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @05:14PM (#14800123)
I'm amused to find that XTerm still include a Tektronix 4014 emulator.
Re:Terminal and shell performance by wmf on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @03:09PM (#14799209)
OTOH Alacritty can supposedly redraw the entire terminal in 2 ms, so perhaps those tradeoffs have changed over the last few decades.
Re:Terminal and shell performance by steveklabnik on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @03:37PM (#14799406)
An interesting side effect of Alacritty's choices:

> alacritty and terminal.app are fast enough that they’re actually limited by the speed of tmux.

Re:Terminal and shell performance by jwilm on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @03:50PM (#14799502)
FWIW, We're working on adding native support for scrolling. Someone has actually made an attempt at it recently: https://github.com/jwilm/alacritty/pull/657

Initial testing has shown it not to (noticeably) impact perf in our highly unscientific benchmarks.

Re:Terminal and shell performance by steveklabnik on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @04:10PM (#14799657)
Ah great!

I'm a native Windows user these days, so I can't use it quite yet, and as such, have fallen behind the time on news.

Re:Terminal and shell performance by buster on Wednesday July 19, 2017 @04:23PM (#14807573)
That's awesome! No scrolling is what prevents me from using alacritty. Hope this gets merged!