Stylistic questions on UNIX C coding.
in [Unix Programming]
|
Prev: integer
Next: shared memory question
From: Nicolas George on 3 Mar 2010 16:13 Lorenzo Villari wrote in message <20100303140159.04b04a3e(a)kubuntu>: > I have to ask: what's the point nowadays of using a text mode only > editor, apart from hardware restrictions and years of use? I guess > that's "Masochistic answers to Stylistic questions on UNIX C coding"... I think the reason a lot of hackers still use text-mode programs is just because they find them more ergonomic. GUI applications have often an erratic behaviour, even with a well-configured window manager. A lot of application think they are smarter than the user's window manager (and, for most users, they are probably right) and try to steal the focus, raise themselves or override their placement. When you expect a very accurate behaviour from your windows to achieve maximum efficiency, such nonsense is very irritating. Text mode applications do not do any of this. The keyboard focus inside the application is also a significant factor. If you have a good memory and a good habit of the keyboard, keystrokes are so much faster than using the mouse. Even with good toolkits, there are times where the keyboard focus gets lost, and even when it does not, GUI applications rarely optimize the keyboard navigation between widgets.
From: Branimir Maksimovic on 3 Mar 2010 16:17 On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 09:29:24 +1300 Ian Collins <ian-news(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Malcolm McLean wrote: > > Someday someone will write a client that acts like Visual Studio to > > the desktop, but actually executes code on the attached mainframe. > > In fact such systems might exist, though I suspect it's the usual > > story of someone tacking something up which superficially appears > > to attack the problem, without really providing the fucntionality > > required. I've certainly never used such a system. > > Something like > > http://www.netbeans2.org/kb/docs/cnd/remotedev-tutorial.html > > ? Hm , seems complicated to me. I rather stick to text editor for programming. ;) Greets -- http://maxa.homedns.org/ Sometimes online sometimes not
From: Ersek, Laszlo on 3 Mar 2010 16:25 In article <7v7pn2Fl0lU2(a)mid.individual.net>, Ian Collins <ian-news(a)hotmail.com> writes: > Ersek, Laszlo wrote: >> In article <20100303140159.04b04a3e(a)kubuntu>, Lorenzo Villari <vlllnz(a)tiscali.it> writes: >>> I have to ask: what's the point nowadays of using a text mode only >>> editor, apart from hardware restrictions and years of use? I guess >>> that's "Masochistic answers to Stylistic questions on UNIX C coding"... >> >> One point might be "screen real estate" >> >> http://www.usabilityfirst.com/glossary/term_573.txl >> >> aka "no clutter". > > Use a bigger screen! If I do, then I'd like to spend the increased screen real estate on *content*, not fluff. (That is, you're joking, right?) Cheers, lacos
From: Ian Collins on 3 Mar 2010 16:41 Ersek, Laszlo wrote: > In article <7v7pn2Fl0lU2(a)mid.individual.net>, Ian Collins <ian-news(a)hotmail.com> writes: >> Ersek, Laszlo wrote: >>> In article <20100303140159.04b04a3e(a)kubuntu>, Lorenzo Villari <vlllnz(a)tiscali.it> writes: > >>>> I have to ask: what's the point nowadays of using a text mode only >>>> editor, apart from hardware restrictions and years of use? I guess >>>> that's "Masochistic answers to Stylistic questions on UNIX C coding"... >>> One point might be "screen real estate" >>> >>> http://www.usabilityfirst.com/glossary/term_573.txl >>> >>> aka "no clutter". >> Use a bigger screen! > > If I do, then I'd like to spend the increased screen real estate on > *content*, not fluff. (That is, you're joking, right?) There is only so much content you can read! I use 24 and 30" panels and I'm reluctant to use something like Eclipse or NetBeans on the smaller panel, but they are OK on the larger one. Generally I'm not that bothered whether I use emacs or NetBeans, I tend to switch between the two depending on the job at hand. -- Ian Collins
From: Ersek, Laszlo on 3 Mar 2010 16:42
In article <hmmh7o$sta$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, David Given <dg(a)cowlark.com> writes: > On 03/03/10 13:38, Ersek, Laszlo wrote: > [...] >> One point might be "screen real estate" > > As a data point and some unashamed self-advertisement, I recently wrote > a word processor: > > http://wordgrinder.sf.net/ Great screen shots. > What I wanted, in fact, was Word 5 for DOS (the last good piece of > software Microsoft wrote). In fact a lot of people have said that it > reminds them of WordStar, but I've never used that. When I saw the screen shots, I was immediately reminded of Word for DOS -- I used to see a translator working with that, about 16 years ago. > A couple of years ago I wrote 50000 words in 31 days on WordGrinder, on > an ASUS eee, with WordGrinder running full screen. With the status bar > turned off it meant that the *only* text on the screen was what I had > written. It was a supremely comfortable experience. Very nice. Thank you for releasing it as free software. I can also see that WordGrinder is in Debian, starting with lenny, and that you are its maintainer. Hats off! Cheers, lacos |