Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

In case this isn't clear, RefTerm is:

1. Faster in every case tested

2. More fully-featured, including i18n

3. Easier to read and maintain (see for yourself)

4. Shorter

5. Using existing libs, aka interops well

...So none of these typical hand-wavy dismissals apply:

1. "Is it really faster for edge cases"

2. "He probably didn't implement certain features like Arabic and Chinese"

3. "Businesses just wants enough"

4. "Businesses just wants enough"

5. "It probably makes some closed-world assumption"

The performance of RefTerm didn't come from some big tradeoff; it came from using the right perspective and keeping things simple.

Sure, past a certain complexity threshold, you'd have to work for extra perf, but from my observations, folks who immediately jump to the wrong implicit conclusion that "good perf must have required compromises" got conditioned to think this way because the software they work on are already (often unnecessarily) complex.




I don't think dismissal 1 applies anyway - even if RefTerm didn't implement, say, variable-width fonts - you could just build a terminal that uses RefTerm's fast algorithms for the common case, then falls back to the Windows Terminal's slower algorithms for the more general case.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: