How is this better than the lsd tool? #677

Activity

1. StewAlexander-com

   added

   question

   on Nov 20, 2023
2. PThorpe92 commented on Nov 20, 2023

   

   PThorpe92

   on Nov 20, 2023

   Member

   More actions

   I think it's really a matter of personal preference. Exa is a few years older than LSD and already had a large user base by the time lsd came around, so I imagine that many use it out of familiarity. Both are awesome tools, I have used both each for quite some time.

   This might not be the most helpful answer but I am not sure if there are any significant features we have that lsd does not at this point. If you are curious, maybe try it out for a while and see what you think. 👍

   👍React with 👍1Reacted by Christina Sørensen
3. cafkafk commented on Nov 21, 2023

   

   cafkafk

   on Nov 21, 2023

   Member

   More actions

   As PThorpe said, I think it varies between people. For me personally, one of the biggest reasons can be summed as this:

   hyperfine "eza -l --icons" "lsd"
   Benchmark 1: eza -l --icons
     Time (mean ± σ):       4.3 ms ±   0.3 ms    [User: 2.6 ms, System: 4.7 ms]
     Range (min … max):     3.9 ms …   5.7 ms    364 runs
    
    
   Benchmark 2: lsd
     Time (mean ± σ):     101.4 ms ±   2.5 ms    [User: 4.1 ms, System: 8.6 ms]
     Range (min … max):    97.2 ms … 108.2 ms    29 runs
    
   Summary
     eza -l --icons ran
      23.67 ± 1.83 times faster than lsd
   

   However, this is probably better suited to a discussion rather than the issue tracker.
4. eza-community

   locked and limited conversation to collaborators on Nov 21, 2023
5. cafkafk

   converted this issue into a discussion #679 on Nov 21, 2023