As a total side tangent, but I really like the following flow: focus follows mouse but focus doesn't raise the window, clicking on the top bar, or Win+Click raises it (notice how neither of these 2 results in an interaction).
Unfortunately, of the popular DE's, this is only supported in Xfce (?), and it's not supported in Windows or macOS afaik.
I don't care about clicking into the terminal. I don't understand why people do this more and more.
You just need to use your keyboard shortcuts correctly and navigate the tmux/kitty session as it's intended to.
See that's all a matter of workflow? You don't understand it because it's just not for you
Actually, I’d really like to know the answer to this. I’m not a fan of clickable TUIs. Mouse events in my terminal are one of the banes of my existence.
But, if they are more popular with others, that would be helpful to know.
It might be different if these things leaned a little bit into acme - or at least had some justification for what was similar and what was difficult [hah, Freudian autocorrect. Meant: different]. Like; do you want to be a powerful text-oriented tool, or just a mostly-dumb print out?
There are reasons for both - but ignorance shouldn't be one.
A clickable TUI is contrarian to why I use most CLI tools. Neat that they could build this, though, because it suits their needs.
I'm fine with K9s and lazygit key-driven interfaces.
I guess one thing that's good about a clickable TUI is that maybe it's easier to approach for some, wihtout releasing yet another memory hog Electron App?
The code generated by Claude is fully under my control, and I make sure it works exactly as I intend. I could have hidden this by committing it myself, but I choose to acknowledge that I had Claude's help
It’s not your fault. The problem is now that my mother in law can vibe code a complete operating system, I cannot distinguish quality from shit any more. And the last few OSS projects that I tried that had the Claude icon where shit and breaking in many ways.
It's kinda like eternal September but for software engineering. There was a time that just being on the internet, having an email address, etc. was a signal that indicated a level of technical proficiency. Now everyone has that connectivity, it doesn't mean anything anymore.
I think your prior assumption that all OSS projects had a degree of quality is where your problem is. But I get it.
We’ve had low quality code for as long as we’ve had programmable machines. I’ve seen a lot of manually written bad code well before LLMs took over. Nowadays, I primarily look at how long a repo has been around and how active it is. A repo that has consistent activity is probably going to be a higher quality one. Even better if I can follow PRs to see how the code base is evolving.
I will admit it’s become more difficult to tell low quality git repos from higher quality ones. Missing files or incomplete README files are a thing of the past. Claude is very good at filling in the gaps to make all repos at least appear respectable.
The Claude-generated README doesn't inspire confidence in that. I believe you checked all the code, but a lot of people are going to see that README and not give the project a second chance.
But now other people's code is just a starting point for me forking an app to do exactly what I want it to - it's inspiration because code is cheap.
Of course for larger projects we will still need solid components underlying them, but what you're really talking about is just maturity - it's very easy to produce a lot of output now but you can't replace actual history or having more then exactly 1 maintainer.
Jokes aside, Opus 5.5 and Fable 5.1 are on another level. I was recently vibe coding an app, and after three days of prompting or so: sigh “I need to bite the bullet, and finally face the slop” — I started to read the code, and to my surprise, it was adequate. Not an amazing code, not a slop either.
I cleaned it up in one session. 50k LoC of Golang. Although even language is less important nowadays. People make DSL, and LLMs immediately start programming on this DSL.
I hope vibecoding doesn't mean the concept of contributing upstream gets lost. At least some of this (mouse clicking) would have been a great upstream contribution instead of rewrite.
I'm really surprised that "clickable tui" is grinding so many gears here. I've been using Linux for over 20 years. I love a good ol TUI. But nothing about clickability precludes a TUI from being useful. I love mouse support in tmux, for instance. I can shift-arrow my way around windows but I can also just click one (or tap one, if one a touch device). I do this all the time when controlling tmux from my iPhone. Why is this such a bad thing? It makes zero sense. Judge this tool on its merits of being a TUI for interacting with Kubernetes... not because it allows mouse input.
52 comments
When Claude added it, I immediately hated it since you click into the terminal and accidentally click something.
I don't mind something that requires a modifier key like Shift+click to follow a URL
But so many times now I'll click to get focus and now that's selected some option or opened some pane.
If I wanted that, I'd use the Claude Desktop app!
Unfortunately, of the popular DE's, this is only supported in Xfce (?), and it's not supported in Windows or macOS afaik.
Or can we do it with a cli wrapper process?
Actually, I’d really like to know the answer to this. I’m not a fan of clickable TUIs. Mouse events in my terminal are one of the banes of my existence.
But, if they are more popular with others, that would be helpful to know.
There are reasons for both - but ignorance shouldn't be one.
https://9p.io/wiki/plan9/Using_acme/index.html
I'm fine with K9s and lazygit key-driven interfaces.
I guess one thing that's good about a clickable TUI is that maybe it's easier to approach for some, wihtout releasing yet another memory hog Electron App?
Of course with all the running around with AI programming, it would be nice if we could task sometime to making remote desktop not suck on Linux.
Claude code uses react, iirc
Same concept, but github repos now.
We’ve had low quality code for as long as we’ve had programmable machines. I’ve seen a lot of manually written bad code well before LLMs took over. Nowadays, I primarily look at how long a repo has been around and how active it is. A repo that has consistent activity is probably going to be a higher quality one. Even better if I can follow PRs to see how the code base is evolving.
I will admit it’s become more difficult to tell low quality git repos from higher quality ones. Missing files or incomplete README files are a thing of the past. Claude is very good at filling in the gaps to make all repos at least appear respectable.
I appreciate the effort. May I ask how do you tackle this?
But now other people's code is just a starting point for me forking an app to do exactly what I want it to - it's inspiration because code is cheap.
Of course for larger projects we will still need solid components underlying them, but what you're really talking about is just maturity - it's very easy to produce a lot of output now but you can't replace actual history or having more then exactly 1 maintainer.
Jokes aside, Opus 5.5 and Fable 5.1 are on another level. I was recently vibe coding an app, and after three days of prompting or so: sigh “I need to bite the bullet, and finally face the slop” — I started to read the code, and to my surprise, it was adequate. Not an amazing code, not a slop either.
I cleaned it up in one session. 50k LoC of Golang. Although even language is less important nowadays. People make DSL, and LLMs immediately start programming on this DSL.
Why is this a good thing? Have a help you your access via ? and document what the keys are. Don't dumb the interface down.