On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 4:15 AM, Renato dos Santos <[email protected]> wrote: > well, I think that anybody if impress... > but ok
I don't understand what you're saying here, so please explain, but let me say that the suckless ideals are good, though if you look at what st was initially and what it is now you'll see that it has almost 4.5kloc and is still slower than xterm or urxvt. st's code is cleaner than that of xterm and urxvt, but that's unsurprising given its age and missing features. urxvt is especially messy inside. Also dwm's long list of limitations require everyone to maintain a fork with patches to get a usable window manager. Minimizing code size is fine, but limiting usability is a high price to pay.
