GNOME's Mutter Adds XWayland Full-Screen Games Workaround

[pal666]

Oh my.. do you even know what you're talking?

are you insisting i should stick to sample wikipedia lists?

[Volta]

how is it relevant to toolkit discussion?

Are you serious or did you just scrapped your brain too much?

they weren't gtk3 apps either. it takes time because you aren't helping, i already told you they are lacking manpower

You don't say, genius?

it's a very stupid argument because qt has no compatibility with gtk whatsoever

You're f*cking stupid, but I'll explain: Qt didn't break compatibility so often like gtk3. That's why some people decided it will be better to stick with stable Qt rather than rewrite extention or whatever crap they were making all the time.

moron, it's a non-exhaustive list. all of them are linked to gtk3 on my system

Just because Firefox or LibreOffice use gtk3 dialog it doesn't make it gtk3 app, moron.

[Volta]

and where is link to gnome bugtracker where it has twice memory footprint of kde?

There won't be, because an only prize for as'sholes is middle finger. However, here's something interesting:

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/issues/1853

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/issues/1772

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/issues/1631

Ps. do you want me to disbelief Gnome's system monitor?

[Volta]

are you insisting i should stick to sample wikipedia lists?

No, I'm just saying you're f*cking stupid.

[pal666]

Are you serious or did you just scrapped your brain too much?

i am serious. now try bringing some evidence to backup your crazy claims

Qt didn't break compatibility so often like gtk3.

You're f*cking stupid, but I'll explain: fixing all of compatibility breakages of gtk3 is much less work than porting to qt

That's why some people decided it will be better to stick with stable Qt rather than rewrite extention or whatever crap they were making all the time.

some people can only decide "to stick with qt rather than rewrite in gtk3" when they have qt codebase. when they have gtk3 codebase, they can only decide to stick with gtk3 rather that rewrite in qt

Just because Firefox or LibreOffice use gtk3 dialog it doesn't make it gtk3 app

lol, they are not gtk3 because they are not part of list which says in first sentence "This is a dynamic list and may never be able to satisfy particular standards for completeness" ? in case your vivid imagination is drawing pictures of them using more gtk2 than gtk3, they are not using gkt2 at all. and no qt at all.

but since you are so aggressive imbecile who has nothing to backup his claim other than clueless link to wikipedia, i'll bite. your link has subsection 7.1 web browsers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s#Web_browsers
and its first line says Main page: Web browsers that use GTK
and first item on that page is firefox

[pal666]

here's something interesting:

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/issues/1853

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/issues/1772

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/issues/1631

that's 3 bugs. i don't see comparison with kde. are you implying kde has no bugs?

Ps. do you want me to disbelief Gnome's system monitor?

did you measure kde memory usage with gnome's system monitor?

[pal666]

No, I'm just saying you're f*cking stupid.

i have wikipieda link for you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunnin...3Kruger_effect

[aht0]

did you measure kde memory usage with gnome's system monitor?

Unless DE grabs 10+ gigs of RAM, why'd you care about memory usage at all? It's not like RAM is expensive or hard to get, be it DDR4 or DDR3..

[Volta]

i am serious. now try bringing some evidence to backup your crazy claims

I think there's already enough evidences of your stupidity. I'm serious.

You're f*cking stupid, but I'll explain: fixing all of compatibility breakages of gtk3 is much less work than porting to qt

Stupid idea from stupid man. Is it better to mess with this crap every time they break compatibility or to port it to Qt and don't care anymore?

some people can only decide "to stick with qt rather than rewrite in gtk3" when they have qt codebase. when they have gtk3 codebase, they can only decide to stick with gtk3 rather that rewrite in qt

In the future, moron.

lol, they are not gtk3 because they are not part of list which says in first sentence "This is a dynamic list and may never be able to satisfy particular standards for completeness" ? in case your vivid imagination is drawing pictures of them using more gtk2 than gtk3, they are not using gkt2 at all. and no qt at all.

but since you are so aggressive imbecile who has nothing to backup his claim other than clueless link to wikipedia, i'll bite. your link has subsection7.1 web browsers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s#Web_browsers
and its first line says Main page: Web browsers that use GTK
and first item on that page is firefox

No, they're not gtk3, because they're not written in gtk3. It's such simple imbecile. Furthermore, the list you have shown proves what I said earlier: Firefox uses gtk3 under Linux for simple things (dialog maybe). It's also used for extensions, but UI is written in XUL and html5.

[Volta]

that's 3 bugs. i don't see comparison with kde. are you implying kde has no bugs?

No genius, but KDE doesn't leak on my system and according to KDE system monitor uses much less memory. Furthermore, in comparison to Gnome KDE seems to be perfectly bug free. At least I'm not seeing any serious bug right now.

did you measure kde memory usage with gnome's system monitor?

No genius, because it will load gnome libraries and memory usage will be higher.