4 ms·

First, dont like it? Dont use it. No need to cry over it. Second, dont like it? Write something better, do show case and maybe people like it and start using i

by Borg3 2y ago

First, dont like it? Dont use it. No need to cry over it. Second, dont like it? Write something better, do show case and maybe people like it and start using it. Third, not everyone needs to use 100s of MB of memory to render some idiotic emoji along the text using GPU accelerated routines. Those old legacy stuff is lightweight, its everywhere so I can run stuff on platforms that problem existed before you were even born. I myself love CLI. Its reliable, easy to use, fast!! interface. I cant really imagine a computer without CLI.. Its like? WTF? :)

vacuity 2y ago
While no one is entitled to other's time for free software, your comment is needlessly dismissive and discouraging. People can have legitimate complaints and try to rally others to change the status quo. No one is encroaching on your right to use the software you choose. You also seem to have preconceived notions of what GP envisions. You can stick to your own thing, but don't stifle the creativity and fervor of others.
- Borg3 2y ago
  But I dont see it as being creative. He is just complaining, not even giving any new ideas.
bmitc 2y ago
> First, dont like it? Dont use it. No need to cry over it. > Second, dont like it? Write something better, do show case and maybe people like it and start using it. Anytime I use a graphical tool, command line afficionados effectively reel in disgust. So I'd say that it's those people who need to get over that some people don't like typing in a terminal to do their work and want to work differently and often more efficiently.
- Borg3 2y ago
  GUI is more efficient? Joke.. JOKE :) GUI have it uses, for example data presentation and visualization. Oh I have nice tools here too. But data manipulation and query? CLI only or mixed where you query in CLI, got graph output.
9dev 2y ago
> First, dont like it? Dont use it. No need to cry over it. I have to use it. That's the point. The CLI is an important and great piece of technology; I just don't love the way things are, and would prefer to see them improved instead. > Second, dont like it? Write something better, do show case and maybe people like it and start using it. This is not how stuff like that works. Terminal interfaces are an ecosystem; there are a lot of different projects attempting new approaches, but there's no shared sense of the existing problems—as proved by your comment. I've written my original comment to make more people aware of those issues, increasing awareness. > Third, not everyone needs to use 100s of MB of memory to render some idiotic emoji along the text using GPU accelerated routines. Those old legacy stuff is lightweight, it's everywhere so I can run stuff on platforms that problem existed before you were even born. I didn't argue for that; in fact, I didn't even argue for removing the existing legacy stuff. Maybe try reading the original comment again? Just because we have a working solution doesn't mean we should stop innovating. There are tons of UX improvements possible beyond rendering emojis, such as proper inter-process message passing via standardised interfaces- just imagine piping from `ls` to any other process, and have that process know that it just got a list of file references, instead of a bunch of characters (Powershell does something similar). Let terminals offer completions like IDEs do. Let them render proper progress bars, without abusing braille characters. There's so many things people do just because they did them like this since forever, they stop questioning if there isn't a better way.
- Borg3 2y ago
  Well, innovating or start bloating? Usually I see things being overengineered because we MUST innovate. No innovation = going backward. Progress bar? what for? Is something like that not enough? Transmiting files: 3/20 (12%), 675kB/s Or sth like that. Far more informative that just progress bar. And can render anywhere, easly, over 9600bps too.
  - 9dev 2y ago
    Sure, that is a progress bar. And it's something countless devs have wasted hundreds of man-years reimplementing over and over again, instead of delegating to the terminal application. Because we're stuck with handling transparent character sequences.

by Borg3 2y ago

vacuity 2y ago

While no one is entitled to other's time for free software, your comment is needlessly dismissive and discouraging. People can have legitimate complaints and try to rally others to change the status quo. No one is encroaching on your right to use the software you choose. You also seem to have preconceived notions of what GP envisions. You can stick to your own thing, but don't stifle the creativity and fervor of others.

Borg3 2y ago
But I dont see it as being creative. He is just complaining, not even giving any new ideas.

bmitc 2y ago

> First, dont like it? Dont use it. No need to cry over it. > Second, dont like it? Write something better, do show case and maybe people like it and start using it. Anytime I use a graphical tool, command line afficionados effectively reel in disgust. So I'd say that it's those people who need to get over that some people don't like typing in a terminal to do their work and want to work differently and often more efficiently.

Borg3 2y ago
GUI is more efficient? Joke.. JOKE :) GUI have it uses, for example data presentation and visualization. Oh I have nice tools here too. But data manipulation and query? CLI only or mixed where you query in CLI, got graph output.

9dev 2y ago

> First, dont like it? Dont use it. No need to cry over it. I have to use it. That's the point. The CLI is an important and great piece of technology; I just don't love the way things are, and would prefer to see them improved instead. > Second, dont like it? Write something better, do show case and maybe people like it and start using it. This is not how stuff like that works. Terminal interfaces are an ecosystem; there are a lot of different projects attempting new approaches, but there's no shared sense of the existing problems—as proved by your comment. I've written my original comment to make more people aware of those issues, increasing awareness. > Third, not everyone needs to use 100s of MB of memory to render some idiotic emoji along the text using GPU accelerated routines. Those old legacy stuff is lightweight, it's everywhere so I can run stuff on platforms that problem existed before you were even born. I didn't argue for that; in fact, I didn't even argue for removing the existing legacy stuff. Maybe try reading the original comment again? Just because we have a working solution doesn't mean we should stop innovating. There are tons of UX improvements possible beyond rendering emojis, such as proper inter-process message passing via standardised interfaces- just imagine piping from `ls` to any other process, and have that process know that it just got a list of file references, instead of a bunch of characters (Powershell does something similar). Let terminals offer completions like IDEs do. Let them render proper progress bars, without abusing braille characters. There's so many things people do just because they did them like this since forever, they stop questioning if there isn't a better way.

Borg3 2y ago
Well, innovating or start bloating? Usually I see things being overengineered because we MUST innovate. No innovation = going backward. Progress bar? what for? Is something like that not enough? Transmiting files: 3/20 (12%), 675kB/s Or sth like that. Far more informative that just progress bar. And can render anywhere, easly, over 9600bps too.
- 9dev 2y ago
  Sure, that is a progress bar. And it's something countless devs have wasted hundreds of man-years reimplementing over and over again, instead of delegating to the terminal application. Because we're stuck with handling transparent character sequences.