Replies: 2 comments
-
|
You cannot. There is no significant performance penalty to opening a new
connection and closing it after sending your update. Try it and see.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
Oh and this will fix the issue of kitty not responding on the second socket while the first is open: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Run kitty as
kitty --single-instance -o allow_remote_control=yes --listen-on=unix:/tmp/kitty.socketcat | socat - unix:/tmp/kitty.socketNow in another window do
kitten @ ls,it hangs until you terminates the connection in the first window.
The use case is piping vim statusline updates to kitty thru a persistent socket connection. Of course I could work it around by creating then destroying a connection on every statusline update, or I could print control characters to the tty.
Both approaches have drawbacks. Creating and destroying connections obviously have performance penalty (I haven't tested the performance, though). And, printing to the tty isn't thread-safe. Each print() is prone to interleaving characters with other print() instructions thus resulting in corrupted control sequence. This is exactly the reason I switched from wezterm to kitty.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions