7 ms·

Serious apps should come with event logs and command lines, period.

by codr7 5y ago

p2t2p 5y ago
Correction: Event logs should be transaction logs instead and you must be able to travel through it reverting and re-applying actions. It should be branch-able and allow you to jump between those branches.
- linspace 5y ago
  I can do that with Emacs. What other tools make it easy to branch in history?
  - skinkestek 5y ago
    For small values of easy: vim. (It is really easy to do I think, doing it correctly instead of just being clumsy and hitting some key that starts it, that is the challenge ;-) I only learned now that emacs could do it.
    - Sophira 5y ago
      I didn't know that vim could do this! I've always assumed that undo/redo (u/^r) were my only options. For anyone else who didn't know, try ":help undo-branches" or take a look at https://vim.fandom.com/wiki/Using_undo_branches https://vim.fandom.com/wiki/Using_undo_branches , which has a simple example of use.
  - jeofken 5y ago
    Emacs branching got way better with undo-tree, check it out :-)
  - marcosdumay 5y ago
    GIMP. This is one thing it does very well, it beats emacs hands down in history visualization (at least without undo-tree, I've never tried it).
xmprt 5y ago
I feel like from a design and architecture point of view, building an application with the command line as a first class citizen will ensure that the application is well designed.
- stult 5y ago
  It ensures separation of concerns is at least minimally applied in order to support two separate presentation layers (GUI & CLI). CLIs are also much more testable in general, so usually it’s easier to write e2e tests if a CLI is present. It might not cover 100% of the code because it doesn’t test the GUI, but does often get you something substantial like 90% of the way there.
  - bopbeepboop 5y ago
    It depends on the application, but CLIs can make testing GUIs easier in two ways: - you can test the rendering layer in isolation by using the GUI to display two pieces of information manipulated by the CLI and comparing the renders, eg blank screen -> add some object. - you can comparison test the GUI, eg pressing button X produces the same result as CLI option Y. Properly testing a GUI requires having an internal CLI, in places I’ve worked — eg, app companies.
- p2t2p 5y ago
  Have you ever run `rm -f important_doc.txt` instead of intended `rm -f important_doc copy.txt`? It doesn't matter if it is GUI or terminal interface, software must be _humane_, forgive mistakes and provide a way out. As much as love Unix coreutils and have them in may fingertips, those are the least humane programs I have ever used. Surprisingly, git seems quite humane, even when you screw things up it gives you a lot of safety mechanisms to recover.
  - linspace 5y ago
    > Surprisingly, git seems quite humane, even when you screw things up it gives you a lot of safety mechanisms to recover. You have to earn it. I admit that when I started using git sometimes I made a copy of the repo just in case I ended in a state that made it easier to nuke it and start again
Cthulhu_ 5y ago
I'd take a bit less of an absolutist standpoint myself, but, designing your application so that it has this event log (Command design pattern from back when, but I'm sure it has a more modern name nowadays) and its functionality is separated from its user interface are best practices.

Serious apps should come with event logs and command lines, period.

by codr7 5y ago

Serious apps should come with event logs and command lines, period.

Correction: Event logs should be transaction logs instead and you must be able to travel through it reverting and re-applying actions. It should be branch-able and allow you to jump between those branches.

linspace 5y ago
I can do that with Emacs. What other tools make it easy to branch in history?
- skinkestek 5y ago
  For small values of easy: vim. (It is really easy to do I think, doing it correctly instead of just being clumsy and hitting some key that starts it, that is the challenge ;-) I only learned now that emacs could do it.
  - Sophira 5y ago
    I didn't know that vim could do this! I've always assumed that undo/redo (u/^r) were my only options. For anyone else who didn't know, try ":help undo-branches" or take a look at https://vim.fandom.com/wiki/Using_undo_branches https://vim.fandom.com/wiki/Using_undo_branches , which has a simple example of use.
- jeofken 5y ago
  Emacs branching got way better with undo-tree, check it out :-)
- marcosdumay 5y ago
  GIMP. This is one thing it does very well, it beats emacs hands down in history visualization (at least without undo-tree, I've never tried it).

xmprt 5y ago

I feel like from a design and architecture point of view, building an application with the command line as a first class citizen will ensure that the application is well designed.

stult 5y ago
It ensures separation of concerns is at least minimally applied in order to support two separate presentation layers (GUI & CLI). CLIs are also much more testable in general, so usually it’s easier to write e2e tests if a CLI is present. It might not cover 100% of the code because it doesn’t test the GUI, but does often get you something substantial like 90% of the way there.
- bopbeepboop 5y ago
  It depends on the application, but CLIs can make testing GUIs easier in two ways: - you can test the rendering layer in isolation by using the GUI to display two pieces of information manipulated by the CLI and comparing the renders, eg blank screen -> add some object. - you can comparison test the GUI, eg pressing button X produces the same result as CLI option Y. Properly testing a GUI requires having an internal CLI, in places I’ve worked — eg, app companies.
p2t2p 5y ago
Have you ever run `rm -f important_doc.txt` instead of intended `rm -f important_doc copy.txt`? It doesn't matter if it is GUI or terminal interface, software must be _humane_, forgive mistakes and provide a way out. As much as love Unix coreutils and have them in may fingertips, those are the least humane programs I have ever used. Surprisingly, git seems quite humane, even when you screw things up it gives you a lot of safety mechanisms to recover.
- linspace 5y ago
  > Surprisingly, git seems quite humane, even when you screw things up it gives you a lot of safety mechanisms to recover. You have to earn it. I admit that when I started using git sometimes I made a copy of the repo just in case I ended in a state that made it easier to nuke it and start again

Cthulhu_ 5y ago

I'd take a bit less of an absolutist standpoint myself, but, designing your application so that it has this event log (Command design pattern from back when, but I'm sure it has a more modern name nowadays) and its functionality is separated from its user interface are best practices.