Also not really cross-platform, contrary to what's indicated in the first word of its github description, and the owner is kind of an ass about it https://github.com/kovidgoyal/kitty/issues/6481.
But it should support at least more than one platform. And it's disputable what exactly one considers as a platform, or just a flavor of some platform.
As said, it depends on the definition of platform for this case. All I see is support of a bunch of flavors of one platform, namely POSIX, unixoids, or how you want to call it. Yes, they are different desktop-platforms, but the purpose of this software is still limited to one specific environment. Or to give a different perspective, nobody would call it cross-platform, just because it can run with Gnome and KDE, under X11 and Wayland.
And I'm curious how much adaption happens for each OS really. Are there specific changes for MacOS and BSD, outside of some paths for configurations?
The entire point of POSIX is that, if you only use what it defines, your program automatically becomes cross-platform, because it will run on several Unices, as well as other systems (like Haiku).
It's probably fair to say that an application with native Wayland and X11 support is multiplatform. I can understand somebody disputing that, but certainly Linux and MacOS are different platforms. They don't even share executable formats.
The author replied with the same effort as the person who reported the issue. You kinda need to do this as a maintainer if you don't want to drawn under low quality reports and burn all your energy. I'm sure lucasjinreal would have gotten a kinder answer if they took time to phrase their issue ("demand", at this point, also misguided) nicely.
It's not really, I just remembered wanting to try out this terminal emulator and being quite surprised that something actively advertised as cross-platform didn't support Windows.
I agree that the person posting the issue wasn't really doing it in a diplomatic way, but in the end, the result is the same. I think it's disingenuous to actively advertise something as cross-platform, without even specifying which platforms are actually supported (even if yes, technically it's cross-platform)
> without even specifying which platforms are actually supported
The first line of the README (ok, second line if you include the title) is "See the kitty website" with a link, and on the site the top menu has a "cross platform" entry which then lists "Linux, MacOS, Various BSDs".
It seems like a stretch to classify that as disingenuous.
Maybe, on the other hand: the link you posted was to a benchmark using kitty 0.31, since then it had an all new escape code parser using SIMD vector CPU instructions that sped it up by 2x.
https://sw.kovidgoyal.net/kitty/changelog/#cheetah-speed
I never understood why people want a bunch of features on their terminal. I just want a terminal that doesn't get in the way of my tools. Alacritty is great at that
Kitty is a different beast to Alacritty and has tonnes of features (many of which I'm grateful for), but I wonder what the performance cost is.