>> need an enormous array of hacks to emulate basic features
What are those hacks. As far as I can remember, TUIs ran faster on ancient hardware then anything else on today's modern computers.
People know perfectly well that I am talking about the way in which a terminal emulator can be used to display 2D graphics. By utilizing specific escape sequences to draw arbitrary glyphs on the terminal grid.
>What are those hacks.
Everything is a hack. TUIs work by sending escape sequences, which the terminal emulator then interprets in some way and if everything goes right you get 2D glyph based graphics. Literally everything is a hack to turn something which functions like a character printer into arbitrary 2D glyphs. Actually look at how bad this whole thing is. Look at the ANSI escape sequence you need to make any of this work, does that look like a sane graphics API to you? Obviously not.
>As far as I can remember, TUIs ran faster on ancient hardware then anything else on today's modern computers.
This is just delusional. Modern 2D graphics are extremely capable and deliver better performance in every metric.
>> This is just delusional.
That is a bit uncalled for.
We are not talking about DOS, we are talking about "modern" TUIs you would use on a modern Linux/Windows/MacOS system.
I even made that explicit in my first paragraph.
By the way one of the most frequent modern TUI apps that I use is Midnight Commander. It's a very nice app, which I use mostly when I SSH into a remote machine to manage it. Is there a 2D accelerated GUI that can help me do the same?
Of course. Just mount it through ssh and use whatever file manager you already have. It is very silly to switch tools just because the machine is somewhere else.
Switching tools just to accommodate the machine being remote is just bizarre to me. You even said that you used mc mostly for remote machines. What is the point of that? Now you have to use at least two tools which do the exact same thing, except you only use one when the system is remote? Does that not seem like a total waste? It would be one thing if you said that mc is what you always used, but that is not the case, you actively switch tools just to accommodate the machine being remote. Why? Do you think that is reasonable at all, when something as simple as just mounting over ssh exists?
>> Why? Do you think that is reasonable at all, when something as simple as just mounting over ssh exists?
In short yes. I use it mostly on remote machines and on my desktop Linux machine. Before that I used Norton Commander on DOS. I don't remote only from Linux machines but also from a Windows laptop. It is much quicker and easier to simple run "mc" in an ssh session when I need it than trying to mount the drive and then run another application on the local machine.
Of course it doesn't, because it isn't a graphics API. It's a styled text API.
> Modern 2D graphics are extremely capable and deliver better performance in every metric.
A big part of the complaint is https://danluu.com/keyboard-latency .