# Alacritty vs Kitty: source lines of code compared

The Alacritty vs Kitty comparison on OctoCounts shows side-by-side source line counts for alacritty/alacritty and kovidgoyal/kitty, counted with the same engine and analysis options on the dates shown in the methodology line: files, total lines, code lines, comment lines, blank lines, and per-language totals, pinned to the exact commits listed below.

As of 2026-08-26, alacritty/alacritty contains 37,968 total lines (28,905 code) across 118 files, while kovidgoyal/kitty contains 375,185 total lines (272,599 code) across 910 files as of 2026-09-17. kovidgoyal/kitty is about 9.4x the size of alacritty/alacritty by code lines. Code size is not code quality: a larger count only means more source material, not a better or worse project.

| Metric | [alacritty/alacritty](https://octocounts.com/github/alacritty/alacritty) | [kovidgoyal/kitty](https://octocounts.com/github/kovidgoyal/kitty) |
| --- | ---: | ---: |
| Files | 118 | 910 |
| Total lines | 37,968 | 375,185 |
| Code lines | 28,905 | 272,599 |
| Comment lines | 3,429 | 72,261 |
| Blank lines | 5,634 | 30,325 |
| Languages counted | 10 | 12 |

Top languages in alacritty/alacritty: Rust (85.4% of code), SVG (9.9% of code), BASH (1.8% of code). Top languages in kovidgoyal/kitty: Python (27.1% of code), Go (26.5% of code), C (26.0% of code). Rust, SVG, BASH, GLSL, TOML appear only in alacritty/alacritty's top languages; Python, Go, C, C Header, Objective-C appear only in kovidgoyal/kitty's top languages.

Methodology: both counts come from cached OctoCounts reports generated with tokei. alacritty/alacritty was counted at ref master (commit ede2ac144da4) on 2026-08-26; kovidgoyal/kitty was counted at ref b079feaf43c1fc79d616a2acc916856fbf09da1b (commit b079feaf43c1) on 2026-09-17. See the [counting methodology](https://octocounts.com/docs/methodology) for ignored directories and analysis options.
## About this comparison

alacritty/alacritty counts Alacritty: a GPU-accelerated terminal emulator written in Rust, including its core, platform frontends, and documentation. kovidgoyal/kitty counts kitty: a GPU-accelerated terminal also implementing its own graphics protocol, written in C with Python extensions (kittens), plus its tests and docs. Both are terminal-emulator source trees, counted on the dates shown above.

The language tables carry the main structural fact: Alacritty's counted code is Rust while kitty's is C with a Python extension layer — two different implementation stacks for the same category of application.

kitty's counted tree includes its graphics-protocol handling and the kittens extension subsystem, while Alacritty's deliberately stays minimal, so the total difference partly records how much functionality each project chooses to host in the core repository.

_Terminal choice is not derivable from these numbers: rendering speed, latency, and feature set depend on the code that runs at render time and on configuration, not on the raw size of either source tree._

Sources: [alacritty/alacritty repository](https://github.com/alacritty/alacritty) · [kovidgoyal/kitty repository](https://github.com/kovidgoyal/kitty). Statements verified 2026-09-16.

Evidence and next steps:

- [alacritty/alacritty SLOC report](https://octocounts.com/github/alacritty/alacritty)
- [kovidgoyal/kitty SLOC report](https://octocounts.com/github/kovidgoyal/kitty)
- [Compare alacritty/alacritty and kovidgoyal/kitty interactively](https://octocounts.com/compare?left=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Falacritty%2Falacritty&right=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fkovidgoyal%2Fkitty)

Note: code size is not code quality. OctoCounts only reports reproducible line counts and makes no claim that either project is better.

## Compare FAQ

### Which has more lines of code, alacritty/alacritty or kovidgoyal/kitty?

kovidgoyal/kitty has more code: 272,599 code lines versus 28,905 for alacritty/alacritty, about 9.4x as much, based on cached OctoCounts reports as of 2026-09-17.

### Does more source lines of code mean more complexity?

Not necessarily. SLOC measures size, not complexity, quality, or maintainability. A larger codebase can mean more features, more generated or vendored code, more verbose language idioms, or more tests — none of which imply the code is harder to work with. Use SLOC to gauge the scale of what you'd be reading or maintaining, not as a quality signal for alacritty/alacritty, kovidgoyal/kitty, or any repository.

### How is this comparison calculated?

Methodology: both counts come from cached OctoCounts reports generated with tokei. alacritty/alacritty was counted at ref master (commit ede2ac144da4) on 2026-08-26; kovidgoyal/kitty was counted at ref b079feaf43c1fc79d616a2acc916856fbf09da1b (commit b079feaf43c1) on 2026-09-17. See the counting methodology for ignored directories and analysis options.

### Can I compare a different branch, tag, or commit?

Yes. This page shows the default branch for each repository. Use the interactive comparison tool to pick any public GitHub repository, branch, tag, or commit SHA for both sides and get a fresh side-by-side report.

## Related OctoCounts pages

- [Interactive repository comparison](https://octocounts.com/compare)
- [Recently analyzed repositories](https://octocounts.com/recent)
- [Popular SLOC reports](https://octocounts.com/popular)
- [Trending GitHub repositories](https://octocounts.com/trending)
- [Hall of Monoliths](https://octocounts.com/hall-of-monoliths)
- [Original research: how filtering changes SLOC counts](https://octocounts.com/research)
- [GitHub SLOC counter guide](https://octocounts.com/docs/github-sloc-counter)
- [Counting methodology](https://octocounts.com/docs/methodology)
- [SLOC and code metrics glossary](https://octocounts.com/docs/glossary)
- [OctoCounts API docs](https://octocounts.com/docs/api)