hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

essence-of-foo · 2010-04-16 15:21:55

vik_k wrote:

@skripka
here's is the best part,
He advised me to leave "vim" & use an IDE (I was really heart broken by that).

Vim has gone a long way since its creation and it now shares a lot of features with IDEs.
Just because it is a command line app (even with a graphical version called gvim) it does not mean, that it can't be used for the efficient development of programs today.
In fact, the simple embedded text editors in IDEs are inferior because they lack many of the common und useful editing commands in Vim.

I prefer command line apps because they are efficient to use and they interact very well with each other. And I love using tmux over SSH.
However, most people obviously don't like CLI apps because they appear to be cryptic and are not self-explanatory. And that's why most applications today should have a GUI: Most people will probably not learn how to use the command line.

It is important to remember that we live somehow in two worlds: The hobbyist/open source community and the comercial world where software needs to shine the day it is released.
Open source projects typically start, because a programmer needs a certain functionality. And because others may have a similar problem, she shares the program she has written, the way she is comfortable with it. And "comfortable" usually means with a CLI interface, because GUI is usually an overkill. So this makes at least some people happy.

And later on someone may add a GUI to the program. It's open source after all.

Last edited by essence-of-foo (2010-04-16 15:22:53)

s1gma · 2010-04-16 16:36:51

As usual, it really depends on what you are doing with your computer. If you only email / surf the web / chat on msn, why not stick to GUI... But I can't think of something related to coding / system administration that need other tools that grep / awk / sed / vim or emacs. Plus a web browser for ... web browsing, yes ! I challenge any GUI IDE "guru" to be faster than a medium vim or emacs user.
Same thing with log parsing. The day a GUI app can extract and process data faster than awk, grep and sed, please notify me (actually, don't !).
Search your disk -> find + locate

The only bad thing is that it won't impress girl at the pub. GUI apps won't either, so... :-)

PJ · 2010-04-16 17:40:08

s1gma wrote:

I challenge any GUI IDE "guru" to be faster than a medium vim or emacs user.

While a gui IDE might not be faster for raw text editing there are some things that are better in a gui, mainly visual representation. The code base doesn't always have to be represented as text, it could be for example a tree hierarchy of functions, classes, namespace or any other code related. I like how eclipse structures for example search result, call hierarchy in trees, code in a certain file, it makes it alot easier to get an over all picture of someone else code. It doesn't always have to be a tree structure, I think Code Bubbles has an interesting concept.

Diff tools in gui actually gives a better undestanding of changes between different versions.

I do enjoy both gui and cmd line, both have different pros and cons. I think it mostly comes down to use the right tool for the right job.

Last edited by PJ (2010-04-16 17:42:45)

soulicia · 2010-04-17 10:50:59

I think for a computer science class, there is no need to teach the students on how to use their computer.
It is better if he (your professor) teach how to make use of a computer.

If you feel better to use the CLI then use it.
If you feel better to use the IDE then use it.
If you prefer both, then use them.

Even if you prefer to use a hammer on your computer, then use it (please confirm that IT IS REALLY YOUR COMPUTER).

FREEDOM FOR EDUCATION.

Foucault · 2010-04-17 13:12:14

soulicia wrote:

If you feel better to use the CLI then use it.
If you feel better to use the IDE then use it.
If you prefer both, then use them.

Exactly; is a matter of personal preference. No matter what programming environment one may use I'm sure it won't produce code of its own (well, I still hold my doubts for emacs on that...).

rwd · 2010-04-18 09:12:32

A problem with guis is that they are often distro/de/version specific while the linux/unix commandline apps work the same everywhere. Also by definition guis are a layer of abstraction, and some things are not so suitable to express graphically. OTOH with a well designed gui you can just click around for a few minutes to figure it out, while with commandline apps you need to read a manpage and remember keyboard shortcuts, so they are worth the time investment if you use them a lot.

Last edited by rwd (2010-04-18 09:15:58)

Vamp898 · 2010-04-18 11:32:26

Its simple like that

Sometimes the CLI is the fastes way to access something, sometimes not!

Use it when its faster!

For example pacman/yaourt is much !_easier_! (yes it is) and faster to access than with any gui tool.

But in some point he is right too. Using 100 Terminals and the minimalistic GUI setup aviable just to be happy about that you got it working that minimal and the imagination that you have very big advantages is not true at all.

for a noob a GUI is essential. He have to use it to work. A pro user can use it where he have advantages and go to the CLI when CLI is faster.

Imagine you have 3000 Folders and you want delete every folder starting with a

for i in $( ls | grep ^a ); rm -rf $i; done

how to do with a gui? i bet even on a fully blown kde-meta installation you need to install additional tools.

You cant say "that is right" or "that is wrong".

At least i have to say. I know Computer Programmers they are only able to use Windows. I know Linux users who can not write a line of code and use CLI

So using a CLI on a GNU/Linux System have nothing to do with development at all and i bet that emacs can even be more mighty than the XY Dev-Tool what your professor uses (for the protocoll. I don´t use emacs)

karabaja4 · 2010-04-18 14:20:32

I agree CLI is faster for system administration/configuration. With little practice you can do anything with just a few commands.

However, I can't see the advantage of CLI (vim) in using it as a programming tool. I mean, it might be better for small programs and scripts in familiar programming languages (<1000 lines), but using it for large projects with few thousands lines of code next to a good IDE seems ridiculous. IDE has many advantages when using an unfamiliar program language, like code completion or forms designer, sometimes it can be very useful.

My college prefers .NET technologies, coding applications mostly in C#, and I can't imagine coding the applications of same complexity in vim. I don't know, maybe I just grew to dependent on such tools. Lately I've been experimenting with GTK+ and made a few simple programs with it, but I find it hard to learn and what's more important, time consuming. I chose C as my programming language, it seemed like an obvious choice. Many times I caught my self tinkering with memory leaks, overflows and problematic data types than actually doing the work. Maybe I'm just not familiar enough with C/GTK+ to do the work fast enough.

Again, I don't deny that using vim/CLI has some advantages over IDEs, but when coding large (or team) applications, IDE seems like a only choice for me.

splittercode · 2010-04-18 18:10:56

I only started using linux about 6 months ago, so I'm not terribly informed on this topic. However, after figuring out a bunch of tricks for bash (tab completion, ctrl+r, aliases and functions in .bashrc) I am annoyed to no end whenever I have browse through a file tree with a gui file manager. It's just slow and tedious. As far as I'm concerned a gui file manager is just a convoluted, messy way of doing things, although thumbnails are nice for vids/images. The same is true of other apps like vim, rtorrent, ncmpcpp/mpd, naim, vifm, and htop. For me, they are much more straight forward and simple(in the Arch Way sense) to use than their gui counterparts.

I guess I just don't really see the point of having GUI applications for performing functions that have no graphical aspect to them, as the good terminal apps have all the same functionality, are more stable, and use less memory in my experience. The only GUI apps I currently use are uzbl and music composition software, which HAVE to have a gui. Also, terminal apps by necessity have lots of keyboard shortcuts for every function, and combining that with a tiling window manager such as awesome lets me do things done much faster than I ever did with a gui-heavy system + mouse, but I guess thats a separate discussion altogether.

Trent · 2010-04-18 18:25:56

Vim is a good IDE. Look up :make and ^X-mode some time. The only disadvantage I know of is the lack of a visual debugger, which isn't available (to my knowledge) for most of the languages I work with anyway. The contextual completion could use some work, but it's not shabby when you forget a file name or function name in your current project.

Vamp898 · 2010-04-18 20:49:05

In my oppinion QtCreator is quite an awesome IDE.

If you write stand-alone Qt Applications there is _nothing_ better than Qt and thats for sure. If it wouldn´t use qmake (which needs Qt) as Make system i would it even use to write GTK+ Applications.

schivmeister · 2010-04-18 21:54:47

For the last couple of months, I've been away from home and on a third-world mission with an NGO, frequently finding myself having insufficient power or bandwidth. This has led me telinit'ing to 3 a lot, and to the point that I have now mastered the use of mplayer with fbdev and fullscreen.

My laptop now lasts 2 hours without power, and the best part is that I can watch a movie in that 2 hours. So, thank you CLI.

Oh I'm not finished. Speaking of movies, my laptop, by the market's standards, shouldn't be able to play 1080p full-HD videos (1.6GHz Core Duo, Intel GMA 950). And that's right, SMPlayer fails to play 1080p. But guess what, mplayer flies 1080p like a supercomputer. So, thank you once again, CLI.

jt512 · 2010-04-19 01:35:35

some-guy94 wrote:

IMO, some things are better as point and click (eg. most browsing, do you want to keep pressing tab just to click 'Sign in' on a website?)....

I'd rather use Vimperator than either of your options.

Jay

lifeafter2am · 2010-04-19 12:43:46

jt512 wrote:

some-guy94 wrote:
IMO, some things are better as point and click (eg. most browsing, do you want to keep pressing tab just to click 'Sign in' on a website?)....
I'd rather use Vimperator than either of your options.
Jay

Agreed.

AbeAkesson · 2010-04-19 13:52:10

I can't remember where I read it, but someone once suggested that the command line is for people who prefer to read and GUIs are for people who prefer to look. I thought that was an interesting idea, although I don't totally agree with it.

Speaking personally, I enjoy using the command line, and the only use a few GUI applications.

Trent · 2010-04-19 14:49:25

AbeAkesson wrote:

I can't remember where I read it, but someone once suggested that the command line is for people who prefer to read and GUIs are for people who prefer to look. I thought that was an interesting idea, although I don't totally agree with it.

Works for me. Reading FTW!

Blue Peppers · 2010-04-20 14:40:10

Maybe your professor just enjoys trolling people who see anything as a matter of pride?

dunc · 2010-04-20 18:26:58

splittercode wrote:

I guess I just don't really see the point of having GUI applications for performing functions that have no graphical aspect to them

That's a very good point. And hard to argue with.

ngoonee · 2010-04-21 01:31:45

dunc wrote:

splittercode wrote:
I guess I just don't really see the point of having GUI applications for performing functions that have no graphical aspect to them
That's a very good point. And hard to argue with.

I guess I just don't really see the point of having CLI applications for performing functions that don't make sense without the graphical aspect.

Works both ways. Best thing about linux is that you can CHOOSE. And the professor isn't going to change that.

tlvb · 2010-04-21 16:53:21

ngoonee wrote:

I guess I just don't really see the point of having CLI applications for performing functions that don't make sense without the graphical aspect.

I've never heard anybody make that argument, while the opposite is quite common. (text apps and apps not inherently groupable in either set being better as gui apps).

JezdziecBezNicka · 2010-04-21 19:19:19

GUIs are needed for interactive applications, while cli utils are mainly "purely functional".

That said, I'd like to point out that vim, mc, pine, nethack etc. are gui apps (their guis are made of characters).

Zeist · 2010-04-21 19:26:07

For some reason this reminds me of the first programming class I took at university where the teacher said that everybody that programs serious things use an IDE. He was an uninformed windows-only programmer though.

karabaja4 wrote:

I agree CLI is faster for system administration/configuration. With little practice you can do anything with just a few commands.
However, I can't see the advantage of CLI (vim) in using it as a programming tool. I mean, it might be better for small programs and scripts in familiar programming languages (<1000 lines), but using it for large projects with few thousands lines of code next to a good IDE seems ridiculous. IDE has many advantages when using an unfamiliar program language, like code completion or forms designer, sometimes it can be very useful.

Code completion that is far better than that of Visual Studio is there in Vim with omnicomplete, and you can always use a form designer in parallel to it... but that does require some kind of graphical interface.

ngoonee · 2010-04-22 02:22:40

tlvb wrote:

ngoonee wrote:
I guess I just don't really see the point of having CLI applications for performing functions that don't make sense without the graphical aspect.
I've never heard anybody make that argument, while the opposite is quite common. (text apps and apps not inherently groupable in either set being better as gui apps).

Well, you'd almost never hear it here, of course, or among coders (most linux users dabble in coding at some point).

Try talking to graphics designers about how much fun it would be doing picture editing in CLI. Even something simple (that can be run from CLI) like cropping is inherently easier and more intuitive with the mouse and a good GUI.

The right tool for the right job. This is a linux distibution forum, AND its Arch, the majority opinion is going to be heavily CLI-leaning. GUIs do have a place, too.

tlvb · 2010-04-22 12:41:31

Exactly my point. I've never heard anybody state that cli, thanks to it's obvious superiority or whatever, should be used for everything.

ngoonee · 2010-04-22 13:17:33

tlvb wrote:

Exactly my point. I've never heard anybody state that cli, thanks to it's obvious superiority or whatever, should be used for everything.

Perhaps not in those words, but it seems (to my understanding) to be implied sometimes, by some posters. Not that this is going anywhere, I realize.

Arch Linux

#51 2010-04-16 15:21:55

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#52 2010-04-16 16:36:51

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#53 2010-04-16 17:40:08

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#54 2010-04-17 10:50:59

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#55 2010-04-17 13:12:14

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#56 2010-04-18 09:12:32

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#57 2010-04-18 11:32:26

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#58 2010-04-18 14:20:32

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#59 2010-04-18 18:10:56

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#60 2010-04-18 18:25:56

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#61 2010-04-18 20:49:05

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#62 2010-04-18 21:54:47

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#63 2010-04-19 01:35:35

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#64 2010-04-19 12:43:46

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#65 2010-04-19 13:52:10

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#66 2010-04-19 14:49:25

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#67 2010-04-20 14:40:10

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#68 2010-04-20 18:26:58

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#69 2010-04-21 01:31:45

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#70 2010-04-21 16:53:21

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#71 2010-04-21 19:19:19

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#72 2010-04-21 19:26:07

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#73 2010-04-22 02:22:40

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#74 2010-04-22 12:41:31

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#75 2010-04-22 13:17:33

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

Board footer