4 ms·
All these things you listed are objectively bad and a tumor and I'm glad that those that are gone, are gone for good, because the one that stayed is a menace to
by phrenicfraud 3y ago
All these things you listed are objectively bad and a tumor and I'm glad that those that are gone, are gone for good, because the one that stayed is a menace to any programmer caring about his sanity.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- rhabarba 3y agoWhat's wrong with Acme?
- lproven 3y agoBad how and why? I mean, as editors, for instance, Vi and Emacs are horrible ugly things that were rendered obsolete by the Apple Lisa in 1982, let alone by the mainstream success of the Mac a couple of years later. And yet, they persist. X11 is a horrid lashup for what most people actually use it for. And yet, it remains way more mainstream than Wayland, say.
- rhabarba 3y agoWell... https://dreamsongs.com/WorseIsBetter.html https://dreamsongs.com/WorseIsBetter.html
- lproven 3y ago100% this, yes.
- kps 3y ago> Vi and Emacs are horrible ugly things that were rendered obsolete by the Apple Lisa in 1982 Disagree. In the vi/TECO model and emacs to a slightly lesser extent, you operate on text, using text, with an input device that has a 1:1 mapping to units of text. In the Lisa model, you operate on pictures of text.
- lproven 3y agoI think that you misunderstand my point here. As far as the UI goes, the critical distinction is not about how it looks on screen or how it is rendered, it's about modal versus nonmodal user interfaces. I happened to side with Larry Tesler on this: "don't mode me in!" As far as Emacs goes, I was more thinking about its strange set of user interface conventions and terminology, which pre-date (and conflict with) industry standards such as the IBM CUA set of standards which came to almost completely dominate DOS, Windows, and Linux. How the appearance of the thing is rendered on the screen is completely irrelevant to this.
- rhabarba 3y agoAll text editors are modal editors though, all text editors have a command mode and an input mode. In (q)ed/ex/vi and their direct and/or spiritual successors, you'll reach Command Mode by pressing Escape. In Emacs, it's Ctrl/Alt/Meta. In Acme, it's the mouse. Even editors which (almost?) follow the CUA standards have a Command Mode - using the Ctrl modifier key.
- lproven 3y agoI think that may be over-generalising a point into irrelevance. All editors have commands of some kind, yes. Otherwise, it's not an editor. But holding down a modifier key is not a mode in the software. You could sort of argue it's a mode of the keyboard,. or of the key, but I think it's over reaching. I've seen editors with no menus, no visible UI at all, just hotkeys that do stuff. It is still a UI even if it is not visible. There are apps for blind Windows users with no visible presence on the screen at all, such as the Qwitter Twitter client. If pressing the Ctrl key suddenly made the app switch into a different type of operation until you pressed it again, that might count, but it doesn't. The app doesn't even need to know. It just knows "keycodes #F to #Z enter letters, but #A to #E are commands". There are no modes here.
- GabrielTFS 3y agoAre you including UTF-8 in "those things" that are "objectively bad and a tumor" ?