[bozey07]

That seems a bit rude. You get the QA you paid for - zero.

And nevertheless, whenever Windows software doesn't work in Wine, you shouldn't think "Wow, how did you fuck that up?". They never promised it'd work in WSL.

[the_gipsy]

It's a company, not volunteers. They're obviously have some long-term strategy to extract money beyond support (it's an editor). They are doing a lot ok marketing right now (dev-rel).

It's very much okay to have high expectation, even if the product costs zero. The user is the product, and so on.

[bobbylarrybobby]

Code that panics on bad external input (such as the OS) is incredibly sloppy. They already have the Result — they can just bubble it up and present an actual error message (and maybe even ask for diagnostics, etc).

[daghamm]

I disagree.

They are on front page of HN with "zed on Linux is here". We got to have some standards, don't you think?

[Carrok]

One could easily reply an equally snarky answer of “Use a real OS, not MSFT spyware. We got to have some standards, don’t you think?”

[umanwizard]

WSL is a pretty niche version of "Linux". I would guess that close to 0% of what makes it to the front page of HN had a QA team that explicitly tested it on WSL.

[jorams]

It's pretty self-evident that Linux support can't be expected to mean Windows support. If something is broken in the Windows simulation of a Linux GUI stack you should be complaining to Microsoft, not to the developers of a program that works fine in a normal environment.