We've written a shitty twm and a crippled terminal emulator, both of which require recompiling for mere configuration

>we've written a shitty twm and a crippled terminal emulator, both of which require recompiling for mere configuration
>now we can tell you what is harmful and what isn't

God I hate Uriel.

>im too stupid to configure a simple c program
the funny thing is you don't even have to configure it
st -f monospace is enough

we had this thread already.
getting blown the fuck out wasn't enough the first time?

>what is scrollback

>what is tmux

dwm is a godlike piece of software

>having to run a terminal multiplexer to compensate for how shitty it is.

>shitty
that's just like your opinion man

>Liberation Mono:pixelsize=12
whoops my bad, even that's no needed
you'd just apply your snowflake solirized patch

>suckless fags

>wanting to suck moar
fag

>Stop liking what I don't like: The Thread, 2 - Electric Boogaloo
So what if some people like doing computing differently than you do? Stop being so bitchy about it, you fag.

suckless is people who don't use computers to do anything useful, but are looking for the ultimate, enlightened computing experience.
Like Buddhists. Fucking useless.

Why don't suckless fags do the same, instead of shitting on """harmful""" stuff?

cat-v and suckless are two different things

Suckless is about a bunch of experienced C programmers openly admitting C isn't suited for anything larger than 1ksloc, which is exactly how I feel. The only thing I don't understand is why they keep using it afterwards.

suckless are assholes and idiots, it's disappointing I thought people who were after simplicity would be smart. nope.

Is this Sup Forums's equivalent to subredditsimulator?

st+tmux and urxvt have roughly equal kloc measurements, but tmux provides st with more *actual* features where urxvt spent those on perl for ...clickable links? i have never witnessed anybody in real life use urxvt with any perl scripts other than that.

see
the suckless people are fucking pragmatists in comparison, and regardless of your opinion they have written good software that people use. (dwm, mainly, but that's 1 more than everyone but haasn and maybe 1-2 other mpv contributors on this board.)

your interpretation is flawed, they did not decide that c was the problem, they decided that learning a new, more complex, slower, less reliable (static code analysis built into your compiler does not make up for this, not that there aren't things that could), less portable, less useful (there are approximately 4 languages that have >1% usage and are also capable of having a kernel written in any implementation in existence of them, and 2 are older than c), and/or less actually well designed language was somehow magically going to be *better* than c.
they decided that /no/ program, no matter what algorithms you pick, that solves a utility problem, should have significant complexity. it is simply unnecessary.

wouldn't be surprised if it was the samefag who posts the same musl thread every other day

>how to patch
>how to recompile
Did you want infant training wheels with your GUI? Can you only "read" picture books?

No, I wanted functional software that isn't designed by retards who think less = more (protip: it isn't).

Less isn't more. Less is less, but it can be just as functional as any, depending on the use... If you're someone who needs their hand held when crossing, then the fault is with you.

how is dwm compared to other window managers? i think i might install it

with minimal configuration it can basically do everything i3wm can, except for in-place restarts and a few edge features.
it's really pretty great, and that's in SPITE of it being 1kloc, if that is a benefit to you (i.e. single-file patches), it could be fantastic/optimal.

It is actually pretty great.

just don't