4 ms·
> Is your argument that no one should create TUI applications except within Emacs? Not at all. I said in my original comment that I am all for creating TUI app
by distcs 4y ago
> Is your argument that no one should create TUI applications except within Emacs?
Not at all. I said in my original comment that I am all for creating TUI applications. And also that the work done by Textual is nothing short of impressive.
What I ask here is why new users are averse to using Emacs+packages when they are ready to put similar time investment in learning TUI applications which also come with their own commands, keybindings, workflows and learning curve?
- funklute 4y agoArguably, the terminal is more general. Pretty much every developer will at some point have significant interactions with a terminal. The same cannot be said for emacs. On top of that, the terminal is a more general-purpose tool than emacs, and it is much less opinionated than emacs (each TUI tends instead to do their own thing, for good or bad). I think the bottomline is that it's quite natural to delve into TUIs, when needed, whereas emacs requires a bit more of a dedicated interest (I say this as someone whose main driver was emacs for many years, though I've now gone back to (neo)vim).
- maydup-nem 4y ago> general You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
- funklute 4y agoI am perfectly aware what that word means, and it is exactly the word I wanted to use. Instead of being a condescending asshole, perhaps you can explain what you disagree with.
- jen20 4y ago> why new users are averse to using Emacs+packages when they are ready to put similar time investment in learning TUI applications Not a new user, but because I use vim as an editor, IntelliJ as an IDE, and have precisely no interest in emacs. On the other hand the new TUIs I use are minimal in number - k9s and damon are the extent.