refterm VS autocomplete

refterm, a terminal emulator proof of concept.

> licensing it so that they couldn’t even look at it

https://github.com/cmuratori/refterm/blob/main/LICENSE

It’s just GPL 2.0, what are you talking about!?

Are Microsoft employees vampires that will burn up instantly if they merely glance at GPL code or something?

This is sour grapes nonsense from Microsoft. “We don’t like your tone so we won’t even dignify your argument by considering it.”

At one point an MS employee said they would love to fix their code as suggested by Casey but he refused to even look at the YouTube video!

“I would love to hear your arguments but I refuse to listen to the sound of your voice.” is next-level dismissive.

You might also find https://github.com/cmuratori/refterm interesting.

Casey Muratori made a renderer/terminal a short while back. Might be a good reference of you intend to go that route. https://github.com/cmuratori/refterm

You keep complaining that it's not a fully working terminal. Casey, on the other hand, writes here: [1]

> These features are not designed to be comprehensive, since this is only meant to be a reference renderer, not a complete terminal.

[1] https://github.com/cmuratori/refterm#feature-support

After that post they did implement a full reference implementation:

https://github.com/cmuratori/refterm/commits/main

And there is movement in getting changes into the terminal itself:

https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/10461

For a basic example of why you would want GPU acceleration, have a look at refterm: https://github.com/cmuratori/refterm

Even processes that you wouldn't think would be impacted by a terminal can be hurt relaly bad by your terminal's performance: your compiler's logs, etc. The GPU rendering part merely guarantees that your terminal sticks at 60FPS (or, whatever your refresh rate is) if the processing behind is efficient.

Having contributed to the Fig autocomplete specs, I find this sad. The Amazon product Fig was built into basically works as replacement, which is good. Still, the core value of this product are the open-source autocomplete specs: https://github.com/withfig/autocomplete. What's going to happen to that? It looks like they are still using it in the Amazon product. It should definitely be possible for an open-source re-implementation of the Fig UI to use those specs. There is a lot of knowledge encoded in there!

8. Fig

Fig is awesome but with signups blocked[1] for 2+mo already it's also as good as dead ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

* [1]: https://github.com/withfig/autocomplete/issues/2068

https://github.com/withfig/autocomplete is it this?

How is this different than https://fig.io/?

AWS CloudWatch Evidently The worst. No comment. AWS seems to perpetually lack a good DX for developers. It appears that they don't recognize or continually undervalue the importance of roles other than engineers, such as Product Managers or Designers. Very disappointing. However, AWS has recently acquired Fig, so looks like they're now pursuing an acquisition strategy instead. Let's see how it turns it out, and let's hope they don't ruin Fig, since it's such an useful tool.

slightly tangential, but where do people get awesome landing pages like linear(https://fig.io/. has similar landing page) etc. Do they build them in-house or buy templates somewhere? Many of the recently launched YC companies have awesome landing pages. eg. https://automorphic.ai/,

I love this product, have contributed several times to it, and I'm a little torn. One thing I am thinking about now, is that the completion specs are MIT-licensed, and it should be possible to use them to re-implement a basic open-source version of the autocompletion product... https://github.com/withfig/autocomplete