I'm quite confused why this article tests foot v1.16.2, which is two years old at this point. The latest version is 1.25.0.

By contrast, the tested version of ghostty v1.2.3 is two weeks old.

Good point. I just submitted a pull request with new data for foot 1.25.0 https://github.com/jquast/ucs-detect/pull/17. The test suite is really easy to run (and fast, foot rocks!).

Similarly kitty is at 0.44.0 [0], zutty at 0.16.0 [1]

0.https://github.com/kovidgoyal/kitty/releases/tag/v0.44.0

1. https://git.hq.sig7.se/zutty.git

Yep this is my current favorite too. I liked ghostty when I evaluated it, but for some reason it uses an order of magnitude more memory than foot to display a single, empty terminal.

Ghostty uses GTK + GPU rendering while Foot uses Wayland primitives and CPU rendering.

I've seen zero performance issues with foot.

My comment was not to imply that Ghostty performed better than Foot. Foot is a great terminal.

I agree. I started using Foot based on a recommendation from the notcurses library author, who has deep expertise in terminal emulation and collaborates with maintainers.

A tip for new users: The default theme is a bit harsh. I was able to port my Alacritty theme and other config by feeding the config file to an LLM (along with the Foot documentation). It generated a configuration that was 80-90% correct and only required about five minutes of manual fixes.

The result is now visually identical to my Alacritty setup, but Foot feels faster.

Foot is the best. Love ctrl-shift-o to open up links