zlacker

[return to "Why users cannot create Issues directly"]
1. Maxiou+Yb[view] [source] 2026-01-02 03:23:27
>>xpe+(OP)
For example, memory leak investigation is currently spread across discussions, x/twitter and discord https://x.com/mitchellh/status/2004938171038277708 https://x.com/alxfazio/status/2004841392645050601 https://github.com/ghostty-org/ghostty/discussions/10114 https://github.com/ghostty-org/ghostty/discussions/9962

but has not graduated to issue worthy status

◧◩
2. quantu+Jc[view] [source] 2026-01-02 03:33:09
>>Maxiou+Yb
That's a shame to hear. I had to give up on Ghostty because of its memory leak issue. Granted, it was on an 8GB system, but that should be enough to run a terminal without memory exhaustion a few times a week. Foot has been rock solid, even though it lacks some of Ghostty's niceties.
◧◩◪
3. favfla+Uf[view] [source] 2026-01-02 04:09:27
>>quantu+Jc
btw, is it me or is there any justification for anyone including a developer to run more than 8GB of RAM for a laptop? I don't see functionality as having changed in the last 15 years.

For me, only Rust compilation necessitates more RAM. But, I assume devs just do RAM heavy dev work on a server over ssh.

◧◩◪◨
4. tynorf+ug[view] [source] 2026-01-02 04:15:03
>>favfla+Uf
Chrome on my work laptop sits around 20-30GB all day every day.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. typeof+Yg[view] [source] 2026-01-02 04:20:37
>>tynorf+ug
I wonder if having less RAM would compel you to read, commit to long term memory, and then close those 80 tabs you have open.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. transc+Th[view] [source] 2026-01-02 04:29:54
>>typeof+Yg
I wonder if a good public flogging would compel chrome and web devs to have 80 tabs take up far less than a gigabyte of memory like they should in a world where optimization wasn’t wholesale abandoned under the assumption that hardware improvements would compensate for their laziness and incompetence.
[go to top]