• 0 Posts
  • 4 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 27th, 2024

help-circle

  • Yeah, complexity is a valid concern. But if your workflow stands to benefit from the performance gains, I’d say it’s a worthy trade-off.

    The server/client model that Foot uses is actually pretty clever for RAM-constrained situations, especially if you’re spawning tons of terminal instances. AFAIK, it’s not fundamentally impossible with GPU terminals. Ghostty has single-instance mode on Linux that shares some resources, but the RAM savings aren’t as dramatic because GPU terminals maintain texture buffers and rendering state in VRAM per instance.

    The catch with Foot’s approach is all I/O gets multiplexed on a single thread. That’s fine for lightweight usage, but for workflows like mine that involve heavy TUIs and multiple tmux sessions with dozens of windows/panes with big scrollback buffers, it becomes a bottleneck when one or more panes are flooding output from scripts/playbooks/etc.



  • Bias warning: I spend most of my workdays in the terminal, and I’m also a contributor to Ghostty.

    The most noticeable difference is smoothness when you’re doing intensive terminal work like scrolling through large log files, running TUIs like btop/lazygit/yazi/lnav, or using multiplexers like tmux with multiple panes. Without GPU acceleration, you’ll see stuttering and lag with heavy output or complex interfaces.

    It also makes a big difference in editors like Neovim, especially with syntax highlighting in large files or when scrolling quickly through code. The rendering just feels snappier and more responsive overall.

    Basically, if you spend significant time in the terminal (like I do), the improved responsiveness is immediately noticeable. If you mostly use it for basic shell commands, the benefit is negligible.