Re: [dev] [st] Thoughts on kitty keyboard protocol

From: Страхиња Радић <>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2021 07:18:29 +0200

On 21/06/20 08:25, opal hart wrote:
> Suckless software isn't a void separate from the rest of the world,

Suckless software is following a specific set of principles, and the software
that sucks is not following those principles. The two are separate.

> and
> the "suckless philosophy" is constantly inconsistent with its own
> beliefs.

I will join Hiltjo in asking for examples.

> Of all the issues I have with kitty, GPU acceleration is not one of
> them.

It doesn't matter what issues you might have. It is an unnecessary feature. A
terminal emulator is not a graphically intensive program like a game. It is
meant to enable terminal I/O.

> And display it.

"O" in "I/O" stands for "output".

> There are plenty of other terminal emulators for systems where it would
> be impractical to install kitty.

Why would they need to support kitty's protocol? If we are speaking about st, it
is a finished program, fulfilling its purpose while not adding unnecessary bloat.

> You're on a mailing list for opinionated software to ... complain about
> other opinionated software?

Not complain, just stating that while most suckless programs tend to respect
standards like POSIX, introducing a protocol which is nonstandard to a standards
body, for example ISO, by someone unwilling to potentially modify that protocol
due to the discussion in the said body would be pointless.

> And if anyone
> does want to support this protocol, it would be better done in an
> optional feature patch or a fork.

I agree. However, that was not what Tobias (the OP) called for. It was rather
the inclusion of the support for kitty protocol in base st.

Received on Mon Jun 21 2021 - 07:18:29 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Jun 21 2021 - 07:24:07 CEST