On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 09:13:22AM +0100, DdB wrote: > Am 24.03.2023 um 12:32 schrieb cor...@free.fr: > > Hello, > > > > Should CLI (command line interface) have a nice UI library? > > today web dev has so many libraries that make web pages with > > rich/colorful interactive views.
[...] > Well, how do you call messages, that provoke troll replies? [...] I think you are being too harsh here. Such a question may come genuinely from someone who hasn't experienced the power of the CLI, which, once you've taken the firs step gently takes you to small one-liners, little loops and bigger and bigger programs. It has this seamless "growth path" which helps and entices its users to get better, something I miss from most GUIs, which rather tend to degrade the user to a click machine. I don't know whether this is inherent to GUIs or just the current "social convention" underlying actual GUIs. One might argue that corporations having promoted the first widespread GUIs (Microsoft, Apple, etc) have some interest in keeping their users dependent. Whatever. But what the OP gets right is: this "first step" to be taken is a steep one (I've seen more than enough smart people fight with that). I wish we had the stamina and creativity to help people over that "first step", and having some kind of low level GUI with a soft transition to CLI could be really a helpful tool there. That wouldn't be totally new. In the late 1970ies and early 1980ies (the times of Scheme, Smalltalk and so on) there was this idea that software had to have a pedagogical component enabling their users to "grow" if they wished so. Smalltalk's GUI was composable in ways very few GUIs are today, showing off characteristics you only find in CLIs these days. What happened to this? Anyway, back to the topic: I think you are being unjust by calling troll on this one. I may be wrong, but I recommend applying Hanlon's razor. Cheers -- t
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
