3 ms·
> they often require more resources, are less powerful and hard to automate via scripting That's not a problem with the GUI paradigm, that's a problem with the
by fouric 6y ago
> they often require more resources, are less powerful and hard to automate via scripting
That's not a problem with the GUI paradigm, that's a problem with the current implementations of it.
Current implementations of CLI/TUI programs have many problems themselves: lack of undo, poor discoverability, low intuitiveness, no previewing (e.g. in the equivalent to file browsers), poor documentation (which makes the discoverability and intuitiveness problems worse), and so on.
Moreover, with that context,
> require more resources
...is a very poor reason to use them. Computers are meant to be useful, not to sit there saving compute/RAM/electricity.
(I shouldn't have to add this here, but: obviously, if you have two identical tools but for the fact that one consumes less power, then of course I would say you should use the latter one - this is not that scenario)
- dragonwriter 6y ago> Current implementations of CLI/TUI programs have many problems themselves: lack of undo This is more common with CLI than with TUI, and its largely because the former are generally aimed at lower-level use than TUI or GUI applications.
- fouric 6y agoAny tool that is meant to be so low-level as to not come with undo should be a library, not a command shell that can (and is expected to be) used by non-technical users.