TUIs sucked and they still suck. Programmers are trying to bring them back bc nostalgia I guess? I floated the idea of TUIs to our data engineering team and got very negative responses. (My nostalgia for undergrad turbo pascal TUI I guess lol)
IDEs we had 30 years ago and lost (2023)
391–400 of 607 posts
Re: IDEs we had 30 years ago and lost (2023)
#392I think Emacs still does all of this; the argument the author makes is that it is "arcane", it just uses conventions he is not used to. It is however fully self-documented and interactive. For me the best textual interface I've ever used remains Magit in Emacs: https://magit.vc/ I wish more of Emacs was like it. I actually use emacs as my git clients even when I'm using a different IDE for whatever reason.
Magit is really great, however, it can definitely be quite slow and buggy sometimes
The interface is unique and takes a lot of getting used to. I did need to leverage my extensive experience with Git and Emacs to understand unexpected behaviour but the fault always lay with me.
Given the implications of bugs in such a critical part of a developer's workflow, can you be more specific?
Re: IDEs we had 30 years ago and lost (2023)
#393Re: IDEs we had 30 years ago and lost (2023)
#394I think Emacs still does all of this; the argument the author makes is that it is "arcane", it just uses conventions he is not used to. It is however fully self-documented and interactive. For me the best textual interface I've ever used remains Magit in Emacs: https://magit.vc/ I wish more of Emacs was like it. I actually use emacs as my git clients even when I'm using a different IDE for whatever reason.
> It is however fully self-documented and interactive. Unfortunately not true. I've fired up emacs once or twice, and couldn't even figure out how to save a document because it didn't show me how to do that. It might be more documented than vi (but that bar is *on the floor, vi has one of the most discovery-hostile user interfaces ever made), but it's not self-documented enough to just pick up and use with no instruc…
Re: IDEs we had 30 years ago and lost (2023)
#395I think Emacs still does all of this; the argument the author makes is that it is "arcane", it just uses conventions he is not used to. It is however fully self-documented and interactive. For me the best textual interface I've ever used remains Magit in Emacs: https://magit.vc/ I wish more of Emacs was like it. I actually use emacs as my git clients even when I'm using a different IDE for whatever reason.
Magit is mind blowing. How did the magit guy or people even come up with the data model? Always had the feeling that it went beyond the git data model. And git porcelain is just a pile of shards.
Re: IDEs we had 30 years ago and lost (2023)
#396The IDE was also so clean and intuitive, which was perfect for new programmers.
Re: IDEs we had 30 years ago and lost (2023)
#397Ok, this post is mostly about text-based IDEs, but I think the point mostly stands as well for IDEs in general. I'm thinking about Visual Basic or Delphi. I think such a IDE for Python would really be helpful for beginners. Not text-based, but more like Visual Basic. But everything integrated, everything easily discoverable (that's very important!). Maybe also with such a GUI builder as in VB. And a built-in debugger…
I mean, it's really an IDE similar to what we were used to later with Microsoft Visual Studio, when it had integrated tagging, search, help, API docs, widget examples and libraries etc.
Every time someone tries to tell me what an IDE is, I say nope, that's not an IDE because nothing is integrated there. Xcode could be argued is an IDE (still) but it's a painful one in comparison with Lazarus.
But what do I know, I am so stubborn that I build my own UI frontend framework in Go for the last 6 months because I refuse to go back to the JS world. Hopefully at some point I can make an IDE with that, but who knows how much timd I need for that...
Re: IDEs we had 30 years ago and lost (2023)
#398Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair —- but are you claiming either: 1. The DOS screenshots in the article are in any way reflective of a designer’s input 2. That Windows was a visually pleasing design?
The DOS screenshots are reflective of the PC video hardware of the time. Text mode had a fixed 16-color palette [0] at best, the IBM font including graphics characters was preset, while the aspect ratio of the characters wasn’t fixed (the screenshots in the article are 80x25, but I used 80x40 or 80x50, with correspondingly more quadratic text cells). However, the screenshots aren’t quite representative of how things…
Re: IDEs we had 30 years ago and lost (2023)
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are no escape sequences when running TUI apps in DOS. They have direct memory access to the video card. >> This is just delusional. That is a bit uncalled for.
Did you just not read the rest of my post? We are not talking about DOS, we are talking about "modern" TUIs you would use on a modern Linux/Windows/MacOS system. I even made that explicit in my first paragraph.
By the way one of the most frequent modern TUI apps that I use is Midnight Commander. It's a very nice app, which I use mostly when I SSH into a remote machine to manage it. Is there a 2D accelerated GUI that can help me do the same?
Re: IDEs we had 30 years ago and lost (2023)
#400Ok, this post is mostly about text-based IDEs, but I think the point mostly stands as well for IDEs in general. I'm thinking about Visual Basic or Delphi. I think such a IDE for Python would really be helpful for beginners. Not text-based, but more like Visual Basic. But everything integrated, everything easily discoverable (that's very important!). Maybe also with such a GUI builder as in VB. And a built-in debugger…
That was Boa Constructor, starting in 2000: https://boa-constructor.sourceforge.net/. It seemed good at the time, but never caught on.