Re: A Different Shell Philosophy
- From: Bruce Barnett <spamhater113+U051220170633@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 20 Dec 2005 22:08:04 GMT
gazelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Kenny McCormack) writes:
> No, exactly the opposite. The problem is that the regulars in this group
> can't evaluate the two parts separately, because they are so bound up in
> the "beauty" of thinking of them together.
Well, perhaps some can, but it's a religious issue - like emacs
vs. vi. Decades ago some people felt the user interface should be
isolated from the shell. I can't remember the name of the AT&T
windowing program that ran on top of the shell, but some people loved
it. I think it came from the plan 9 group.
Then consider Sun's cmdtool interface. Sun tried to address the UI
issue by providing a consistent mouse-based editing system on every
tool in the toolbox, including the shell. But many people hated
cmdtool because it interfered with key-board based editing.
I personally liked using the mouse on the command line.
Here's an interesting discussion on cursor keys by Tog, BTW:
http://www.asktog.com/readerMail/1999-12ReaderMail.html
--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.
.
- References:
- A Different Shell Philosophy
- From: Jon Forrest
- Re: A Different Shell Philosophy
- From: Kenny McCormack
- Re: A Different Shell Philosophy
- From: Michael Heiming
- Re: A Different Shell Philosophy
- From: Kenny McCormack
- A Different Shell Philosophy
- Prev by Date: Re: regex for "find":
- Next by Date: Re: Bash script own path
- Previous by thread: Re: A Different Shell Philosophy
- Next by thread: Re: A Different Shell Philosophy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|