[clintonc]

Curious to know what makes this "a proper VT100 implementation in the browser, not a JavaScript approximation of one" -- isn't Ghostty also an approximation, just implemented in a different language? Seems unnecessarily pejorative to me.

[0x1ch]

Aren't terminals also called... terminal emulators? All modern terminals would be an approximation by this logic. Some approximate backwards compatibility with VT** spec more than others.

[kylecarbs]

Agreed. I removed "not a JavaScript approximation of one" from the README.

[chjj]

I don't mean to derail discussion about a cool project, but it still seems to imply xterm.js is somehow "improper" emulation (though I might be misreading it).

Terminal emulators are all approximations of terminals, regardless of the programming language.

[kylecarbs]

They are approximations but Ghostty has intentional effort towards correctness, more than I've seen from other terminal emulators.

[chjj]

Fair enough. I haven't looked at the internals of ghostty, so I'll take your word for it.

I'm probably also just taking things personally.

[badmonster]

Fair clarification. Does Ghostty's WASM approach have performance advantages over pure xterm.js implementations?