Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME 40's Shell Theme Code Is Rather Expensive But Optimization Pursued

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by Hibbelharry View Post
    Javascript itself is also relatively performant
    relatively to php?

    Leave a comment:


  • finalzone
    replied
    Originally posted by hsci View Post
    But GNOME is wrong not giving the user the needed settings (Do not suspend on close of the LID! THE COMPILER IS RUNNING! The LID is closed because I'm walking around or want to protect the laptop).
    That scenario is very much a territory of a power/advanced user. General users i.e. everyday people rarely use compiler on closed mobile devices like laptop which can run hot during heavy compilation. Tweak software allows a refinement control i.e. disable Suspend when a laptop lid is closed in this case.

    Leave a comment:


  • Turbine
    replied
    Originally posted by Volta View Post

    Let's get it straight: generation of clueless developers who have no real clue what they are doing. The truth is the most complicated and performant applications are written in C/C++. Crap languages like c#/mono, java, javascript are unholy jokes when comes to resources. It seems it's impossible to write complex and performant application in any of mentioned unholy programming languages. It's visible everywhere. From graphic engines (unity crap), programming IDEs (slow, buggy, bloated Eclipse - GDB integration is an only selling point for me) to note taking application - tomboy. It's huge regress and waste of computer resources, but every script kiddy can make an application now.. Not saying this is 100% related to Gnome, though. There may be other problems.
    That's just not true. Back in the day of C++ apps, they used to freeze and lock up all the time. The lack of concurrency and parallel threads were the issue. They were also noticeably more unstable.

    The fact of the matter is, I'm 10x more productive in JavaScript than C++ and can make complicated code which works without holding up the main thread with ease.

    Leave a comment:


  • ermo
    replied
    Originally posted by gedgon View Post
    Nah, it was just a shell facelift. Extensions do not need to be rewritten, but ported, most notably the extensions preferences to GTK4. Everything else is basically the same with some small evolutionary changes here and there.
    That was my impression also, hence my confusion at the "GNOME 3 died" assertion.

    But, hey, it's not a big deal to me anyway as I merely run a GNOME (wayland) instance on a Fedora Workstation box for the sake of keeping up with the Joneses (the box is an older multi-boot reference box to check for ootb UX choices in various distributions/DEs and their relative performance/fluidity on the same hardware config).

    With DragonFlyBSD 6.0 being released, I'm mighty tempted to get an instance of that up and running to be able to compare it with FreeBSD 13. We'll see.

    Leave a comment:


  • hsci
    replied
    Originally posted by ermo View Post

    (emphasis mine)

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I was of the impression that GNOME 40 is really 3.40 (that is, GNOME 3.38 was followed by GNOME 3.40, but due to various development process tweaks, the GNOME developers decided to just drop the "3.") and should thus be viewed as the continuation of the GNOME 3.x series?

    In that light, where did you get the idea that GNOME 3 "died"?

    In support of my argument, consider this summary:
    Actually I'm pretty happy with GNOME 3 and it excellent keyboard workflow. Also I don't miss the desktop or system-try, two awkward failures of history. The big backslash happened with the subsequent GNOME 3.4 and 3.6 release, the removal (Find-As-You-Type, Terminal Transparency, Supsend-To-RAM configuration...). Which got later restored somewhat.

    Regarding GNOME 40. It's fine and stable. But features are broken, the switching between windows in the overview with the keyboard is broken. Neither the cursor keys nor Alt+Tabs works only when you previously focus a window with the mouse
    As I assumed they rushed with pure force till the release date - another of the usual GNOME mistakes. Why release? Because a calendar date was marked six months ago? Polish release until it's is fine (GIMP, Inkscape and many others) or skip it until next release date (Linux, Firefox and so on). The other mistake of GNOME thinking that settings are somewhat bad:

    * Settings are not not bad if developer itself doesn't use them
    * Settings are good when the software becomes better usable for some or all of the users

    The result are five different clock widgets with tiny differences and two entire fork of your projects, sadly the will never merge back to your project because you reject them because of - settings. You lose developers, users and testers. Exactly this is what you want to avoid.

    GNOME learned from GNOME1 and not to overwhelm the user with many possibilities. KDE is still doing it (Do you want your rename dialog as modal popup or inline field?). But GNOME is wrong not giving the user the needed settings (Do not suspend on close of the LID! THE COMPILER IS RUNNING! The LID is closed because I'm walking around or want to protect the laptop).

    Regarding the useage of the Touchpad and virtual desktops., I doesn't affect me. Because I'm a keyboard and trackpoint user solely. The second because GNOME works very well without virtual desktops on laptop screens. I just don't feel the need to search or sort windows. As soon as I have many windows open I type their name into the overview, I don't search them - they are found by GNOME immediately. I was surprised why the bother with that virtual screen stuff so much nowadays but I assume other people need it and it doesn't affects me.

    PS: I'm also starting getting away with tabbing through tabs in IDEs, file- or webbrowser. I just type the name of what I want and it's loaded.
    Last edited by hsci; 27 May 2021, 08:29 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vistaus
    replied
    Originally posted by board View Post

    I'm not sure what has caused this issue, this sure sounds like a HiDPI problem, but on a FullHD screen? It could be bugs in these apps themselves. But yeah, it does happen that Qt is inconsistent with rendering as well.
    HiDPI on a full HD screen? Then those apps probably detect the wrong screen resolution or something. It's a normal ThinkPad laptop with 1920x1080 screen, so nothing out of the ordinary.

    But as I said: it only happens with apps that ship their own Qt libraries - Qt apps using the system libraries look and scale great.

    Leave a comment:


  • gedgon
    replied
    Originally posted by Mez' View Post
    I'm sorry but 40 is a totally different thing: vertical to horizontal, starting in the overview, all extensions needing a rewrite, wayland touchpad gestures, GTK4 coming in parallel, etc... The paradigm of Gnome 3 has partly died. Gnome 40 is as good as a v4. They didn't number it 4 due to a possible confusion with GTK. But it is in spirit. And I'll consider it that way.

    Also, I really like omgubuntu, but your quote is just Joey's opinion, not an official way. And "user-focused" probably got everyone laughing.
    Nah, it was just a shell facelift. Extensions do not need to be rewritten, but ported, most notably the extensions preferences to GTK4. Everything else is basically the same with some small evolutionary changes here and there.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mez'
    replied
    Originally posted by ermo View Post

    (emphasis mine)

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I was of the impression that GNOME 40 is really 3.40 (that is, GNOME 3.38 was followed by GNOME 3.40, but due to various development process tweaks, the GNOME developers decided to just drop the "3.") and should thus be viewed as the continuation of the GNOME 3.x series?

    In that light, where did you get the idea that GNOME 3 "died"?

    In support of my argument, consider this summary:
    I'm sorry but 40 is a totally different thing: vertical to horizontal, starting in the overview, all extensions needing a rewrite, wayland touchpad gestures, GTK4 coming in parallel, etc... The paradigm of Gnome 3 has partly died. Gnome 40 is as good as a v4. They didn't number it 4 due to a possible confusion with GTK. But it is in spirit. And I'll consider it that way.

    Also, I really like omgubuntu, but your quote is just Joey's opinion, not an official way. And "user-focused" probably got everyone laughing.

    Leave a comment:


  • ermo
    replied
    Originally posted by Mez' View Post
    (...)
    Gnome 3 is probably the worst DE I've ever used. Whether you used it with the mouse, the keyboard or a combination of both, it was the perfect antonym to user-friendliness, pragmatism or workflow efficiency. Fortunately, it died, and having no unique specificity, it won't be remembered much in history.
    Gnome 40 is much better in my opinion, at least if you steer it with 3/4-fingers actions on a touchpad. It's still absolute crap with keyboard, mouse or both.
    (emphasis mine)

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I was of the impression that GNOME 40 is really 3.40 (that is, GNOME 3.38 was followed by GNOME 3.40, but due to various development process tweaks, the GNOME developers decided to just drop the "3.") and should thus be viewed as the continuation of the GNOME 3.x series?

    In that light, where did you get the idea that GNOME 3 "died"?

    In support of my argument, consider this summary:

    Enter the GNOME Foundation’s Emmanuele Bassi who, in a forum post to unveil the new versioning, explains the reasoning behind the leap. And the short answer is to simplify the ‘unwieldy’ numbering.
    (...)
    Whether the label reads GNOME 3.40 or GNOME 40, it doesn’t strictly matter. Underneath, it’s still the same hugely popular, user-focused desktop environment.

    (source)

    Leave a comment:


  • board
    replied
    Originally posted by Vistaus View Post

    The issue I have with Qt apps that ship their own libraries is that they don't scale well. Font size is so small, I can hardly read it. And mind you, I'm on 1920x1080, i.e. not HiDPI. It's probably worse on HiDPI screens. That's the only reason I wish app developers stop doing that 'cause font sizing and rendering looks absolutely great on Qt apps that use the system libraries.
    I'm not sure what has caused this issue, this sure sounds like a HiDPI problem, but on a FullHD screen? It could be bugs in these apps themselves. But yeah, it does happen that Qt is inconsistent with rendering as well.

    HiDPI in Qt is actually pretty good these days, not pixel-perfect last time I checked, but very close.
    Last edited by board; 26 May 2021, 01:10 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X