> Will programmers write more efficient code during the memory shortage?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha > The ignore file lives in your machine’s home directory in ~/.config/git/ignore. Whatever filenames are added to this file are ignored globally at a machine-level.
The wording here is slightly wrong: ~/.config/git/ignore will ignore files per-user on the machine, not "at a machine level". And it's not "your machine's home directory", it's your user's home directory on that machine. Any other users on the same machine will not see this. Git calls this "global", as in "global for the user". $ sudo git config --system core.excludesFile /etc/gitignore
$ sudo touch /etc/gitignore
Note however that user config will override this, so any user who has a core.excludesFile setting will not also look at your system level excludes file. Which is a pretty big caveat. someVariable="initial value"
To reset vars back to their initial values, or clean out buggy data, or whatever. > Even with 8 GB, the difference between tycat (assuming it needs no memory at all) and VLC is then about 1% of the machine's capacity.
Maybe you don't tend to use all your machine's resources, but the way I use my machine, it's constantly at near or over 100% capacity. I'm constantly fighting against swap, no matter how much ram I have. Right now my machine is using about 113% of available ram. I'll have to flush it out and clean it up soon to prevent too much swapping. I probably wouldn't want to start vlc right now without closing something else first - if I wanted to watch a video right now I'd use something more lightweight (or something I already have loaded, like my terminal). This is a normal state of affairs for me. > A useful baseline seems to be the actual Linux terminal. It can do 16 colors. Unfortunately, it doesn't even support emojis, though.
In what way is this "a useful baseline"? Useful for what? Why is the extremely-well-supported 256 colour set or RGB not more useful? Who uses linux in text-only mode or with a display that can't do rgb in 2026 in any situation that isn't headless or exotic? Why can't they just run more complex stuff on the framebuffer with rgb colour if they want it? Why, given the above, is emoji support in text-only mode important? to whom? For what? > I ask myself since years: Does this terminal still switch to an actual text mode, or does the text get rendered in a framebuffer by the OS.
Why would anybody who isn't working with extremely exotic legacy hardware care about this in 2026? > And even more so all the applications that I know that I could run inside it.
Which ones don't run in terminology? > Again, I'm always open for something exciting.
...as long as it's not the heresy of displaying graphics in a a teminal. > for all the comfort I get back,
See this is the point right here. You consider it comfort. I consider it nuisance. So go use your GUI applications and enjoy them and let others enjoy their preference. Like I said a hundred thousand years ago. > But yeah, my basic point was not actually to evangelize for Dolphin or VLC or any particular app.
No, it was to say - without having even bothered to try it yourself - that there's no use for a thing that I use all the time. And then in order to support your thesis you started evangelising the massive pile of software that you'd use to achieve what I can do better with one program that I always have running. > Well, how do "the kids" get their Git icons etc? As far as I can remember, they call it "Nerd Fonts".
How are nerd fonts at all relevant to any part of the discussion? > But all I've tried are buggy sometimes in what glyph widths they report
And what happened when you filed bug reports about this? Please link to them, I'll be interested to read your reports for more detail than none at all. > If terminology does better in that regard, good news! Nice!
Well I don't know whether it does or not. Because you haven't bothered to actually describe the issue you claim exists in any detail. Or done anything more than make a vague and as-far-as-i-can-tell-incorrect assertion that terminals can't display emojis properly. As if that was somehow relevant to whether they should be able to display graphics or not. > As an application developer, I still cannot assume that my users all have terminology, so it's still no solution
As an application developer, you have control over this thing called "system requirements" for your software. And you can do things like adding "requires terminology" or "feature X requires terminology" in there. Or you could put a note on the relevant issue in your issue tracker saying "you can work around this by using terminology, which doesn't have this issue". But of course we'd need to know whether that's true, first, and for that we'd need more than zero detail. > it would be odd to just support a handful of formats. Any format should be supported, then. Furthermore, it shouldn't be just a static preview. I also want to navigate around there a bit then. [...] Hell, I basically want to just have Blender there.
I'm sure the enlightenment folks will be happy to look at your patches for these features you want. I'm not sure how you plan to integrate blender, but you've been programming professionally since 20 years, so I'm sure you have a plan and understand in ways that I simply can't comprehend. > We all know this is oversimplified in so many ways... ;)
Do we? I don't. Maybe you can point me to the relevant lines of source code, where it's more than 3 lines. I'll look forward to seeing your link. > This was just about adding the video support (which was already implemented and just needed to be called), not for the graphics support in general, right?
No, it does both graphics and video with the same 3 lines of code. As has already been explained and you ignored and/or failed to understand. > Also, the code isn't even my primary concern at all. Some "improvements" would be just a single line of code, and you'd definitely hate them.
So, to summarise: you bring up an argument that it shouldn't be done due to code complexity, then when that is rebuked because the additional code complexity is very close to zero, just say "the code isn't even my primary concern at all", without elaborating any further to outline what your concern actually is. And to summarise the summary: you don't actually have any reasoning, you just don't like it because you don't like it. > But just the repetition doesn't make it sound more reasonable to me tbh
Then why do you seem to think that saying "herp derp, I don't understand therefore it's a cult" over and over is going to sound more reasonable to me at some point? > That might very much be my fault!
Yep > Unfortunately, you didn't help me in that regard either so far.
Maybe it'd help if you pulled your head out of your ass and actually read what I wrote. > Well, if you have a superior approach, which is quicker and more seamless, I'd definitely want us to see it using for everything!
We're talking about previewing. I have a superior approach for previewing. Which leads me to re-state my previous question: Did I say "editing the thing" or "working with the thing"? > It's probably just another three lines of code to make the mouse position available in pixel granularity. And then we can basically start porting everything into that new paradigm. Why should we then stick with the inferior one?
I suspect it'll be much more complex than that, but you're a professional programmer since 20 years who has never looked at the code or even run the software, so you probably know better than I do. > I had hoped that, once someone starts to develop such a "new class of [...] applications", we could have a more modern foundation for it than ttys.
I look forward to seeing your patch that does this without breaking compatibility with ~50 years of legacy software. > three or four file formats (or whatever EFL supports)
Again, EFL supports a lot of formats. Including ones I didn't even know about, like the pdf and libreoffice docs you wanted. I guess you didn't bother reading that before. > Technically, the application that runs your terminal _is_ a GUI application. I'm not aware of any terminal-based X11 emulators. That's just what I meant. Not more, not less.
So what's your point? How is it relevant that my terminal emulator runs on X? I'm not talking about the environment that runs my terminal, I'm talking about things that run in my terminal. > Ahh, you're also one of the authors of some parts of that software stack?
When did I say that? > Either way, no I don't expect anything
You demanded that support for terminology's graphics sequences needed to be patched into every terminal emulator that exists in order for you to consider it valid for some reason. > I mean "instantly" in a practical meaning. You don't have to explain me once more that it can't be exactly 0 sec in a scientific meaning
So, in other words, when you say "instantly", you mean "not instantly". > my new rewrite of efm (e's built-in filemanagger) also has a terminal-like worklflow. i can literally in the efm window type "ls ./dir" and it will liteally change to that dir and list/show it. same with "cd .." or "rm a.jpg b.txt *.png" and it will delete those files. you can even just run apps like "gimp file.png" .... and it knows gimp is a command and there is a desktop file for it and will let you know by putting an icon next to it.. and it'll just run the command with those arguments
Oh, damn, that sounds cool. I might have to give that a try.
Meanwhile, did you know defectivebydesign.org has been around for 20 years now? Makes me feel old.