The whole electron stack disgusts me. Mainly because of battery usage on my laptop and my phone!
Its a clear example of "We can do it but should we do we?" The answer is NO!
Its a clear example of "We can do it but should we do we?" The answer is NO!
I personnaly think a terminal based on web technologies is not something I would use, but if people are happy to use it, as soon as they are aware of the tradeoffs, why not?
/me goes back to emacs
This comment (though probably by mistake) manages to perfectly illustrate the "reinventing things that we don't even understand" mindset that's going on in most of tech.
(Also, there exist terminals written in C++ with Qt, and QtWidgets has had CSS support for custom styling for at least 10 years, probably much longer.)
macOS built-in Terminal.app has had transparency (even varying transparency for focused vs background windows) for years.
Edit: oh, maybe you were being sarcastic? It's been a long day.
I understand the appeal of having html/css hyperdynamism everywhere.
And at the same time I don't want to pay the price to the point that I prefer living in lotech linux land. I value frugal over potential flexibility these days.
I told that often, but the other day I booted win9x (on a pentium 3 or less, some MB of ram, maybe 64) and ran an old copy of turbo pascal 7 (dos). That thing was flying. It had 80% of what I wanted (including, hear this, ascii shadowed floating editing windows.. talk about overfancy) and used zero resources.
Today to have that kind of interactions you'd need a somehow recent quad core and 4GB+ of ram. All that mostly for a bit of eye candy (css may be of some use to decorate tokens/entities to give additional info, but I rarely see that).
The compilers and IDEs from that era were truly pieces of art. I also remember TopSpeed Modula-2 that also included its own task scheduler for real time DOS (using clock interrupts, I guess).