31–40 of 95 posts
Impressive work! I am not trying to diminish the awesome work done here but I think all of this is already possible in Emacs, right? And Emacs an be made to run in Terminal if the user wants it to, right? Now I am not someone who would ask creators not to build something new because something like it already exists. By all means build new stuff and create new tools. It providers options and choice for user. So I full…
This is an interesting framework, it's refreshing in that you don't need to bootstrap a whole web browser (electron) to build a user interface. I don't really see it's use case though, mostly cli is used for either: A) Ability to run in automated environments (e.g CI) - think aws cli B) Interop, think piping data from grep to xargs C) Hacking - writing a script quick and dirty to just get a job done I'd have thought…
I’ve used Araxis Merge as my diff tool for over a decade. It’s great. I don’t think there’s significant value in reimplementing something in a TUI just for the sake of it.
Nothing wrong with new tools to make building TUI’s easier. I just wish the examples were providing new capabilities rather than old capabilities in a very similar but slightly different form factor.
Impressive work! I am not trying to diminish the awesome work done here but I think all of this is already possible in Emacs, right? And Emacs an be made to run in Terminal if the user wants it to, right? Now I am not someone who would ask creators not to build something new because something like it already exists. By all means build new stuff and create new tools. It providers options and choice for user. So I full…
Impressive work! I am not trying to diminish the awesome work done here but I think all of this is already possible in Emacs, right? And Emacs an be made to run in Terminal if the user wants it to, right? Now I am not someone who would ask creators not to build something new because something like it already exists. By all means build new stuff and create new tools. It providers options and choice for user. So I full…
Impressive work! I am not trying to diminish the awesome work done here but I think all of this is already possible in Emacs, right? And Emacs an be made to run in Terminal if the user wants it to, right? Now I am not someone who would ask creators not to build something new because something like it already exists. By all means build new stuff and create new tools. It providers options and choice for user. So I full…
I’m not sure emacs is a good comparison here - Emacs is a complete environment and set of capabilities, whereas this is a library/toolkit for Python, much smaller/ more specific scope. I think it may be possible to take a python script, and create a UI for it in emacs, but I think the goal here is an python-native solution to turn a python script into a TUI
But so is the shell and the terminal and yet new young folks are much more willing to try out shell+terminal tools than Emacs+packages.
Your comment describes the difference between this toolkit and Emacs perfectly from a dev POV and what you say makes complete sense. But I was pondering from user POV.
I mean when devs use this library/toolkit and create terminal apps, I am sure those terminal apps will find many enthusiastic users. Many of the same users would not find themselves so enthusiastic if Elisp devs provided the same tool to them as an Emacs capability. You see my point? I don't know why this difference in attitude towards terminal tools and Emacs tools exists. Is it because of the reputation of Emacs being old? Or its reputation of unusual keybindings?
Impressive work! I am not trying to diminish the awesome work done here but I think all of this is already possible in Emacs, right? And Emacs an be made to run in Terminal if the user wants it to, right? Now I am not someone who would ask creators not to build something new because something like it already exists. By all means build new stuff and create new tools. It providers options and choice for user. So I full…
Impressive work! I am not trying to diminish the awesome work done here but I think all of this is already possible in Emacs, right? And Emacs an be made to run in Terminal if the user wants it to, right? Now I am not someone who would ask creators not to build something new because something like it already exists. By all means build new stuff and create new tools. It providers options and choice for user. So I full…
Your comment is confusing because emacs isn't a library for creating rich text mode applications. While it has some things that are somewhat similar to things mentioned in the blog, it's an editor at heart...not a rich text/tty library for other tools to leverage.
Impressive work! I am not trying to diminish the awesome work done here but I think all of this is already possible in Emacs, right? And Emacs an be made to run in Terminal if the user wants it to, right? Now I am not someone who would ask creators not to build something new because something like it already exists. By all means build new stuff and create new tools. It providers options and choice for user. So I full…
My pet theory is that its to do with the rate of new developers to the field. I think the accepted figure is something like "the field doubles every five years". To me, this explains things like idea-churn, wheel-reinvention, and "grandpas tools", where you see tried-and-true tools (emacs, in this case) passed by because they lack modern trappings, or because people just never hear about them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My pet theory is that its to do with the rate of new developers to the field. I think the accepted figure is something like "the field doubles every five years". To me, this explains things like idea-churn, wheel-reinvention, and "grandpas tools", where you see tried-and-true tools (emacs, in this case) passed by because they lack modern trappings, or because people just never hear about them.
I mean, nice idea, but I'm a 55 year old Emacs user and I work on Textual.