rasterman

7 ms·

1.
by rasterman 5mo ago
well this is a bit of a slow-ish box. it's my daily driver workstation at work. ampere emag (arm64 machine). numbers taken using strace -tt thus adding some overhead. time to launch eog (gnome/gtk image viewer) and go idle after d
2.
by rasterman 5mo ago
right now in theory it allows different sized icons... the metadata can exist and define it.. but i have not provided a ui to change sizes... but yes... amiga-like :) there is a .efm/ dir in each dir ... and in this can be files for th
3.
by rasterman 5mo ago
This is just a demo right now - buttons surrounding the file view are for testing: http://www.rasterman.com/files/efm-typebuf-ex.webm
4.
by rasterman 5mo ago
This is just a demo right now - buttons surrounding the file view are for testing: http://www.rasterman.com/files/efm-typebuf-ex.webm
5.
by rasterman 5mo ago
the cost of launching a new process with a gui is not cheap. there's a lot of setup before you even get a window up ... when that process is already there (terminal) with all of that cost paid for it is actually provably cheaper in ter
6.
by rasterman 5mo ago
there are in fact ways of drawing raw bitmap data in terminals - look up sixel for starters... but that's not what this is about. the escapes to do images and video are very simple and very lean in terms of i/o from pty to termina
7.
by rasterman 5mo ago
when it's your window manager you are using right now... you tend to debug differently :) yes yes - xephyr and what not. i know...
8.
by rasterman 5mo ago
that was literally me... i stopped it because... well.. short version - chasing bug in efl that blurted out an invalid object stdout errors when http requests for the forecasts module failed - the module relies on a caching proxy service on
9.
by rasterman 5mo ago
well why video in a terminal? 1. it's "free" because the toolkit already offers video objects - feature is there... why not expose it. you just call 2 lines of code or so and and tell it to play. it's similar amount of c
10.
by rasterman 10y ago
> In lua it is customary to bring along your own main loop. > People often start with one based on select, but later move to libevent, libev, cqueues, luv (libuv), glib or others. And that is what we provide - yes the toolkit is built
11.
by rasterman 10y ago
well we already did the integration. it doesn't need exposing. it's meant to be handled by the bindings for that runtime environment specifically or is just always available. so it merges currently with glib mainloop and with libu
12.
by rasterman 10y ago
node.js insists on its own mainloop. python is agnostic. efl already integrates with node's libuv usage and glib mainloop. really gtk requires a glib mainloop. you make glib integrate/sit on top of something elses and efl did the
13.
by rasterman 10y ago
well it's a framework like Qt is... :) or like GTK+ and glib and then some. so if these were acceptable for bindings if they were maintained/up to date then EFL would be. But yeah - we bound to LuaJIT because of performance and FF
14.
by rasterman 10y ago
We may have come up with an alternative for bindings - at least for EFL, where we now generate the C API from an IDL that expresses classes, inheritance, events (signals/slots), etc. so our C API is pushed out by code gen tools and we