Live data from Hacker News

Superfile – A fancy, pretty terminal file manager

github.com

11–20 of 219 posts

Re: Superfile – A fancy, pretty terminal file manager

#12

Brew install superfile Now guess what the executable is called…

Yes, I had the same question! (`spf` for the curious!)

EDIT: To be fair, right at the beginning of the tutorial is:

> First, if you want to open superfile by opening a terminal and typing spf.

Re: Superfile – A fancy, pretty terminal file manager

#15
post #2

Why is this better than Midnight Commander or GNU Interactive Tools?

There's not so much as a screenshot of MC on their official page. Hard to say. Did the author say their product was better?

I think it's fair to ask of any new program why to use it rather than an existing option. And there can be lots of reasons - more active development, new features, less buggy, smaller program (uses less disk/memory, easier to be less buggy), easier to install, easier to use, whatever. And the author of a program doesn't necessarily need to have an answer, especially not early on; programming is sometimes its own reward, and sometimes advantages only become obvious later. But as a user, yeah it's useful to know what advantage this thing has over all the other things that do the ~same stuff.

Re: Superfile – A fancy, pretty terminal file manager

#16
"You can go to the latest release and download the binary file. Once it is downloaded please excrate the file after that enter the following in your terminal:"

Is excrate some new jargon meaning to take something out of a crate? Or just a boring typo for extract?

Re: Superfile – A fancy, pretty terminal file manager

#17

"You can go to the latest release and download the binary file. Once it is downloaded please excrate the file after that enter the following in your terminal:" Is excrate some new jargon meaning to take something out of a crate? Or just a boring typo for extract?

Just typo..

Re: Superfile – A fancy, pretty terminal file manager

#18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's not so much as a screenshot of MC on their official page. Hard to say. Did the author say their product was better?

I think it's fair to ask of any new program why to use it rather than an existing option. And there can be lots of reasons - more active development, new features, less buggy, smaller program (uses less disk/memory, easier to be less buggy), easier to install, easier to use, whatever. And the author of a program doesn't necessarily need to have an answer, especially not early on; programming is sometimes its own rewa…

> why to use it

Of course. But that's not what he asked.

Post reply on HN