On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 02:57:20 +0300
Alexander Krotov wrote:
Hey Alexander,
> I have crafted a program to convert farbfeld images to sixels:
> https://github.com/ilabdsf/ff2sixel
this is very cool! Sixels are definitely an interesting concept to view
images over an
You can abuse the Unicode "Braille Patterns" [1] to display binary
images on the terminal.
I made a demo a while ago [2].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braille_Patterns
[2] http://imgur.com/VSZ5Pxy
2017-03-20 15:26 GMT-03:00 hiro <23h...@gmail.com>:
>> We're here to learn and share
> Yes!
>
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:01:16AM +0100, hiro wrote:
> I'm not at all saying that sixel is a hack, I'm just saying it's
> useless. it doesn't solve any important problem in a generic enough
> way.
> drawterm is not just a "graphical terminal", it's more more comparable
> to remote X11, remote
hi. sorry if this is a FAQ. (though i've been following the list a
while, so, if so, it isn't *that* F of AQ.)
i would find it convenient if all the patches for, e.g., dwm, and/or
files, for surf, say, were in a git repository (either for dwm,
respectively surf, says).
would that make sense?
Hi Alexander,
> On Mar 20, 2017, at 5:01 PM, Alexander Krotov wrote:
>
> In my case I have a remote system with lots of data that I want to
> explore interactively without copying it to my local machine. While
> I can display numerical figures in my terminal, I can't display
I'm not at all saying that sixel is a hack, I'm just saying it's
useless. it doesn't solve any important problem in a generic enough
way.
drawterm is not just a "graphical terminal", it's more more comparable
to remote X11, remote framebuffer, VNC, all of which are rather
generic solutions to
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:10:07AM +0100, hiro wrote:
> why would one want to view images in st, can't your shell start other
> graphical programs for that? is st becoming a new kind of web browser
> now? and why don't you open remote images using a remote file system
> instead of fucking around
One could argue its a little more convenient. I personally like it
because it won't disturb any window layout I had open already. Here's a
thought: Rather than adding all the code to the terminal, a simple patch
could be made which detects a certain escape and will pipe everything
after that for X
why would one want to view images in st, can't your shell start other
graphical programs for that? is st becoming a new kind of web browser
now? and why don't you open remote images using a remote file system
instead of fucking around with remote shells and then trying to
display them in a local
there's nothing convenient in your pityful setup.
"won't disturb any window layout I had open already"
fix your window manager, seems it's not able to manage shit.
that escape you're talking about is called execve and it works just fine.
On 3/20/17, Aditya Goturu
Ah that patch does what I need. Thanks!
On 03/20/2017 10:22 PM, Cág wrote:
> Aditya Goturu wrote:
>
>> I personally like it because it won't disturb any window
>> layout I had open already.
> One could've used the swallow patch[0].
>
> There's already Terminology[1], the Eclipse of terminal
>
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017, at 10:00, robin wrote:
> If only the same honesty could be applied throughout life without bad outcome.
No matter how outrageous the contribution of another party, just don't
be a dick about it. We're all human. We all think something completely
idiotic is a good idea at
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:16:58AM +0100, hiro wrote:
> there's nothing convenient in your pityful setup.
>
> "won't disturb any window layout I had open already"
> fix your window manager, seems it's not able to manage shit.
>
> that escape you're talking about is called execve and it works
After I thoroughly reconsidered by window manager configuration, yep I agree
On 03/20/2017 07:30 PM, robin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:16:58AM +0100, hiro wrote:
>> there's nothing convenient in your pityful setup.
>>
>> "won't disturb any window layout I had open already"
>> fix your
Aditya Goturu wrote:
> I personally like it because it won't disturb any window
> layout I had open already.
One could've used the swallow patch[0].
There's already Terminology[1], the Eclipse of terminal
emulators.
[0]: http://dwm.suckless.org/patches/swallow
[1]:
> We're here to learn and share
Yes!
>, so offer constructive feedback.
No!
16 matches
Mail list logo