www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - [OT] Which IDE / Editor do you use?

reply "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> writes:
Just out of interest.

I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
will try this evening VisualD.
Sep 13 2013
next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
vim
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Orfeo" <orfeo.davia gmail.com> writes:
gvim
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Misu" <misugi-pwnu live.fr> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

Mono-D
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:
Sublime 3 on OSX
Sep 13 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-13 21:51, Peter Alexander wrote:
 Sublime 3 on OSX

Not TextMate on Mac OS X, you're mad :) -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 14 2013
next sibling parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-14 16:42, Peter Alexander wrote:

 What does TextMate do better than Sublime? (genuine question)

I guess I'm more used to TextMate. I like all the snippets and commands. Also that it's easy to customize by adding and changing snippets and commands. It can output results of commands to an HTML view/window. That in combination with it's support for the txmt URL scheme makes it easy to have error message you can click on which points back to the source code. This HTML view is extremely useful. It can also be used to show test results, example: http://jqr.github.io/images/posts/rspec_runner.jpg It's also used together with git to show diffs, logs, statuses and so on. I can easily run scripts like Ruby and other languages. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-14 16:42, Peter Alexander wrote:

 What does TextMate do better than Sublime? (genuine question)

* It shows file icons and SCM status in the side bar. * TextMate 2 has built in support for downloading new bundles. With Sublime I need to download some Python thing and run to be able to download new languages -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 14 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-14 22:32, Peter Alexander wrote:

 For bundles/packages in Sublime, I recommend everyone install the
 Package Control package. I'm surprised it's not built-in by now because
 every package uses it (1559 packages atm)

 https://sublime.wbond.net/

Yes, that's the one I'm talking about. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 14 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-14 23:53, Peter Alexander wrote:

 Sorry, thought you meant that you had to run a Python script for every
 package, my bad.

I had to run a Python script once, to install the package manager. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 9/13/13, Namespace <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:
 Just out of interest.

Scite: http://www.scintilla.org/SciTE.html I use it because it's easy to configure, starts fast, loads big files fast (compared to e.g. Sublime text), it seems to not break on any funky new git-head version of D, and it's open-source.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Craig Dillabaugh" <cdillaba cg.scs.carleton.ca> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Justin Whear <justin economicmodeling.com> writes:
vim and gvim on linux.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:51:34 UTC, Peter Alexander 
wrote:
 Sublime 3 on OSX

No IDE?
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jos van Uden <usenet fwend.com> writes:
On 13-9-2013 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try this
evening VisualD.

Notepad++. I've installed Visual Studio Shell + Visual-D but haven't used it much yet.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jordi Sayol <g.sayol yahoo.es> writes:
Geany

http://www.geany.org/
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
MicroEmacs

https://github.com/DigitalMars/med

https://github.com/DigitalMars/me
Sep 13 2013
next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/13/2013 1:29 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 MicroEmacs

 https://github.com/DigitalMars/med

 https://github.com/DigitalMars/me

BTW, one veery nice thing about ME is I can run it from a remote console window. Also, it works exactly the same on every machine/operating system I've owned (ok, I never ported it to the ipod) - DOS, OS/2, Unix, Linux, every Windows flavor, various notebook computers, etc.
Sep 13 2013
next sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/13/13 1:37 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 On 9/13/2013 1:29 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 MicroEmacs

 https://github.com/DigitalMars/med

 https://github.com/DigitalMars/me

BTW, one veery nice thing about ME is I can run it from a remote console window. Also, it works exactly the same on every machine/operating system I've owned (ok, I never ported it to the ipod) - DOS, OS/2, Unix, Linux, every Windows flavor, various notebook computers, etc.

No syntax highlighting... Andrei
Sep 13 2013
next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/13/2013 1:40 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 No syntax highlighting...

I know :-) I've thought many, many times about transforming it into an IDE with all the goodies. But probably its most annoying lack is not handling Unicode.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/13/2013 1:58 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Syntax highlighting hurts my eyes. I've been using vim in black-on-white
 for more than a decade now. (Well, more accurately, black on an almost
 fully saturated off-white, but that's irrelevant.)

I tend to agree. I think syntax highlighting looks better if it's a subtle color change, not a glaring one. Unfortunately, in text mode, color palette is very limited.
Sep 13 2013
next sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/13/13 3:09 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 Actually, my biggest problem with linux is how terrible the operating
 system is compared to DOS and Windows. I'm not even kidding, the unix
 terminal debacle sucks (maybe good when you had various hardware, but it
 is weak next to what the PC hardware offers), the available system
 facilities suck (Win32 is plenty usable and reliably there! Even on
 linux, using a Windows .exe tends to work better than using a linux
 binary - exe's just work there thanks to wine, whereas linux binaries
 always have some incompatibility).

Sure... wait, what? It's like I woke up and it's backward day :o). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backwards_(Red_Dwarf_episode) Andrei
Sep 13 2013
next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/13/2013 5:39 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 And drawing, oh my. Long story short, coming from DOS or Windows to the
glorious
 land of various buggy, incompatible vt100 emulators is such a shock.

Yeah, I've thought about taking the tty/kbd code from ME and making a phobos module out of it. So many annoying problems that can be abstracted away.
Sep 13 2013
parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/13/2013 7:00 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
 On Sep 13, 2013, at 6:23 PM, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com>
 wrote:

 On 9/13/2013 5:39 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 And drawing, oh my. Long story short, coming from DOS or Windows to the
 glorious land of various buggy, incompatible vt100 emulators is such a
 shock.

Yeah, I've thought about taking the tty/kbd code from ME and making a phobos module out of it. So many annoying problems that can be abstracted away.

Is nurses not sufficient? I've only used it for making roguelikes, but it made working with a text terminal quite easy.

Those cross platform libraries never work cross platform without far more pain than just rolling your own.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/13/13 5:39 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:32:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 Sure... wait, what?

Download a random binary off the internet.

Nope :o). Andrei
Sep 13 2013
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/14/2013 3:13 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 Plus I seem to be the only Windows user in history who has never said
 "Uhh, ok" to a "Super-helpful web browser toolbar! You'll love it!
 Install now!"

People today keep trying to get me to install this linucks-thingy. "Trust me! It's better than Windows!" Yeah, right :-) I'm probably the only Mac user in history who doesn't find it intuitive and has to constantly google how to do basic things.
Sep 14 2013
next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 15.09.2013 04:58, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 16:05:09 -0700
 Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 On 9/14/2013 3:13 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 Plus I seem to be the only Windows user in history who has never
 said "Uhh, ok" to a "Super-helpful web browser toolbar! You'll love
 it! Install now!"

People today keep trying to get me to install this linucks-thingy. "Trust me! It's better than Windows!" Yeah, right :-) I'm probably the only Mac user in history who doesn't find it intuitive and has to constantly google how to do basic things.

Wait, you mean "Mac user who doesn't find *Mac* intuitive"? I spent a year as an OSX guy (way back) and ultimately came to the same conclusion: I couldn't do half of what I wanted without it seeming to fight me at every turn. And it always put up a damn good fight, too. I've used 10.7 since then, and it seems to have only gotten goofier. (At least it's easy to disable the backwards-scrolling.) Even moving the mouse pointer across the screen was (and still is) an effort, no matter what the sensitivity setting. It's no wonder so many Mac users swear by the touchpad - that's the only pointing device where OSX's acceleration is non-broken enough to *let* you move from one end of the screen to the other in *one* motion instead of three or four *and* still be able to hit a button-sized target without surgeon-like hand control.

Really? The only mouse related configuration I tend to change, is to use both buttons, instead of Cmd+Button. Maybe using mices since Amiga 500 days helps :) -- Paulo
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-15 04:58, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Even moving the mouse pointer across the screen was (and still is) an
 effort, no matter what the sensitivity setting. It's no wonder so many
 Mac users swear by the touchpad - that's the only pointing device where
 OSX's acceleration is non-broken enough to *let* you move from one end
 of the screen to the other in *one* motion instead of three or four
 *and* still be able to hit a button-sized target without surgeon-like
 hand control.

Apple have never been good at creating computer mice. I'm using a Logitech MX 510 mouse. I can move the cursor across two 24" displays in one motion. No problems. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-15 12:36, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Really? That's weird: I plugged the actual Logitech trackball I always
 use on Win/Lin into my brother's OSX 10.7 MacBook, and it took on
 average 3 full "thumb movements" (trackball equivalent to moving the
 mouse without lifting it) to get from one side of the screen to the
 other. I've never had trouble going that distance in Windows or Linux
 with only around 1 full thumb movement.

 I tried adjusting the sensitivity (the only mouse sensitivity option
 it seemed to have), but by the time I could get across the screen in
 around one movement, it was so hyper-sensitive I could barely hit any
 specific target without overshooting it a few times.

I guess that might be because I've installed the Logitech drivers/preference pane. When I reboot the computer and it has logged in again the mouse is really slow, then after a few seconds it back to the speed I'm used to. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-15 11:51, Iain Buclaw wrote:

 I wouldn't say better, but it is a rich environment of functionality and
 development.  Also Linux isn't trying to spy on you, isn't constantly
 phoning home to Redmond, and isn't sending your fingerprints to the
 NSA.   :-)

No, it's phoning home to Google, in the form of Android :) -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 14.09.2013 01:56, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
 On Friday, September 13, 2013 23:55:53 Iain Buclaw wrote:
 On 13 September 2013 23:32, Andrei Alexandrescu

 <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:
 On 9/13/13 3:09 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 Actually, my biggest problem with linux is how terrible the operating
 system is compared to DOS and Windows. I'm not even kidding, the unix
 terminal debacle sucks (maybe good when you had various hardware, but it
 is weak next to what the PC hardware offers), the available system
 facilities suck (Win32 is plenty usable and reliably there! Even on
 linux, using a Windows .exe tends to work better than using a linux
 binary - exe's just work there thanks to wine, whereas linux binaries
 always have some incompatibility).

Sure... wait, what? It's like I woke up and it's backward day :o). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backwards_(Red_Dwarf_episode)

I too am confused. I'd say it is the complete opposite too (in my experience :-)

I guess that it's a matter of perspective. Personally, I find the Windows/DOS shell to be completely unusable and use git-bash when I'm forced to use Windows. Windows definitely has some things going for it (e.g. its graphics engine creams the horror that is X.org IMHO), but on the whole, I find that Linux is just way better for a power user like myself. Windows doesn't even come close to cutting it. - Jonathan M Davis

Powershell
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 14.09.2013 08:14, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 06:37:49 +0200
 "dusr" <dusr d.usr> wrote:

 Like I said, I've been a Linux user for a long time, and that's
 by choice! But I still envy a lot of what Windows gets right
 and still long for the good old days of DOS where it was just
 you, the hardware, and a little tiny helper library that was
 there if you needed it.

I've used debian from woody to squeeze, then I moved back to windows7. Windows is better.

Heh, I'm sort of the opposite. I've been using Windows from 3.11 through 7, and from Vista onward I've started to really hate Windows more and more (If I wanted to be running a Mac, I'd have gotten a Mac, not two versions of "New Windows: Apple-Envy Edition" followed by "Microsoft UI-Of-The-Month Club"). Meanwhile, I've been using Linux more and more for testing and servers, and I'm looking at switching my main OS over to...probably Debian 7, with wine and VirtualBox for the occasional things that don't come in Linux flavor. I just wish I could get a Linux file manager I liked.

The main problem with Linux distributions, is that even in 2013, it won't work properly in laptops. Wireless chipsets, battery use and graphic cards (specially hybrid like optimus) are still a problem. Personally I only use Linux on servers, VMs, or laptops sold with Linux support. As an example, last April, an Ubuntu update borked my wireless driver, because of religious FOSS. Ubuntu developers changed the binary broadcom driver, working flawlessly, for the open source one, which was still half done. There is a discussion about it on their forums, if you want a link for it. So nowadays I rather use systems for work, that value my up time. -- Paulo
Sep 14 2013
next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 14.09.2013 12:19, schrieb Iain Buclaw:
 ...

 As for your wireless driver woes, I'm sure you still had the choice to
 go for the proprietary drivers, which would mean you have to also
 blacklist the OSS one (done this plenty in the past, except for
 resolving conflicts with OSS drivers that think they can talk to the
 same device, but one gives me 1m wireless AP scanning range, and the
 other 30m :)

 Regards
 --
 Iain Buclaw

 *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';

Wrong. If you want I can provide the Ubuntu forum discussion. Due to the kernel changes done for the open source version of the broadcom driver, to keep using the binary blob on my laptop, I would need to reflash the wireless card with new firmware. Additionally, not everyone was having success with it. So, I was forced to use either ethernet cabling, or only talk to IPv6 routers until June, which was the tim the open source driver reached feature parity level with what I already had in April. Thankfully it is not my primary laptop. I am not a Linux newbie, I have been using it since kernel version 1.0.9. I just don't have the time to keep tuning the system as I used to, nor do I want to. -- Paulo
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 15.09.2013 12:09, schrieb Iain Buclaw:
 On Sep 15, 2013 12:55 AM, "Nick Sabalausky"
 <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com
 <mailto:SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com>> wrote:
  >
  > On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:31:44 +0100
  > Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com <mailto:ibuclaw ubuntu.com>> wrote:
  > >
  > > Some manufacturers even actively work against Linux at the hardware
  > > level.
  > >
  > >
 http://linuxologist.com/02hardware/even-more-incriminating-evidence-in-the-foxconn-debacle/
  > >
  >
  > Yea. I don't know this will just turn out to just be more Palladium-like
  > anti-MS FUD, but UEFI really worries me. To the point where I'd be very
  > hesitant to buy any computer with Win8 pre-installed. (Not that I'd
  > want to pay the MS tax anyway for an OS I'd immediately wipe off of the
  > HDD.)
  >

 I've actually taken a rash decision and won't buy another x86/x86_64
 device again (going full ARM in the next years once my current kit
 reaches it's end of life).

 Regards
 --
 Iain Buclaw

 *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';

Using a Raspberry Pi as desktop?
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 15.09.2013 01:35, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 17:38:52 +0200
 "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:

 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 06:57:23 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Windows and most of the other distros at the time offered: the
 ability to install a bare minimum system that could still
 function without *requiring* X11

oh god X11 was too brutally slow to use on an older computer anyway. Windows 95 was actually fast.


An interesting anecdote. At the begining of my UNIX days, it was a pleasure to use the usual set of APIs, which tend to be less convoluted than on Windows. Then I started looking into X11 programming with Xlib and Motif, and could not believe that they managed to make it even more complex than any other desktop graphics programming API! On those days, Gtk and Qt were still to be born and framebuffer applications running with setuid coded in svgalib were the way to go for graphics coding on Linux distributions.

My first introduction to Linux was around 2001 with Mandrake and Red Hat (the two main "newbie-friendly" distros at the time). I couldn't believe how insanely sllloooooow Nautilus was compared to Win98 and Win2k on the same hardware. Plus, the X11 installation kept completely destroying itself for no apparent reason. One day, a few weeks after the most recent from-scratch OS installation, X would just simply decide not to start. And I never could manage to fix it without yet another OS re-installation. That, plus the constant tinkering, the awful state of pre-apt/yum packages, and the attitudes of many Linux users at the time left me swearing off Linux and running back to Windows until several years later when I finally gave it another try with "This new Ubuntu thing everyone seems to be talking about." Boy have things improved. Not perfect, granted, but far better than I had ever expected.

While true, this experience is easy to replicate in 2013 with the wrong laptop, sadly.
 Actually though now there's the whole qemu/kvm virtualization
 stuff who's potential I really don't think has been fully
 explored.


 I feel exactly the same way. EVen though I've never been a
 big VM-language fan, machine virtualization rocks. (Aside from Intel's
 deliberate marginalization of it for anything but high-end.)

I like vm languages, if the implementation offers a proper jit. :) As for virtualization, I have also became a big fan and no longer dual boot. -- Paulo
Sep 14 2013
parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 15.09.2013 16:24, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
 On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:04:25AM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 Am 15.09.2013 01:35, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 17:38:52 +0200
 "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:

 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 06:57:23 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Windows and most of the other distros at the time offered: the
 ability to install a bare minimum system that could still
 function without *requiring* X11

oh god X11 was too brutally slow to use on an older computer anyway. Windows 95 was actually fast.


An interesting anecdote. At the begining of my UNIX days, it was a pleasure to use the usual set of APIs, which tend to be less convoluted than on Windows. Then I started looking into X11 programming with Xlib and Motif, and could not believe that they managed to make it even more complex than any other desktop graphics programming API!

Once, in college, I had the totally hare-brained idea of *printing* out the Xlib documentation. Through the department's printer service. It came out as a stack of paper 6 *inches* thick (you do the math as to how many pages that is), which I still have today for posterity. :-P T

I can imagine, I remember the stack of books O'Reilley used to sell. The department guys were very happy with you I guess. :) -- Paulo
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-14 10:23, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 19:56:14 -0400
 "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:
 I guess that it's a matter of perspective. Personally, I find the
 Windows/DOS shell to be completely unusable and use git-bash when I'm
 forced to use Windows. Windows definitely has some things going for
 it (e.g. its graphics engine creams the horror that is X.org IMHO),
 but on the whole, I find that Linux is just way better for a power
 user like myself. Windows doesn't even come close to cutting it.

While I definitely prefer bash to the windows prompt overall, there are some places where I think windows makes the linux cmdline look bad. Like launching a GUI program instead of a CLI: Windows (nice): % program-cli file.txt % program-gui file.txt Linux (wtf?!): % program-cli file.txt % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 &

On Mac OS X I usually use "open" command to open a file in the default application. $ open file.txt Or I can explicitly specify the application: open -a /Applications/TextEdit.app foo.txt -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-15 11:52, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Windows actually does the same thing, except the filename *is* the
 command:

 $ file.txt

 And yea, either way, "open file.txt" or "file.txt", it is kinda nice.
 Although I find I use it very rarely, oddly enough.

I mostly use "open" to open a directory in the file browser: $ open . That's especially useful when opening hidden folders. When opening text documents or source code, most of the time I open with TextMate, which has it's own command: $ mate main.d By default the shell will not wait for the application. I can force the shell to wait with the -w flag, this is useful when writing git commit messages.
 Hmm. What's the benefit over just doing this?:

 $ /Applications/TextEdit.app foo.txt

$ /Applications/TextEdit.app foo.txt -bash: /Applications/TextEdit.app: Is a directory .app "files" are bundles, that is, directories which Finder and other tools treat specially. The actual executable is located at /Applications/TextEdit.app/Contents/MacOS/TextEdit In the case of TextEdit, running: $ /Applications/TextEdit.app/Contents/MacOS/TextEdit foo.txt Will complain that foo.txt doesn't exist. The shell will also wait until the application terminates. Running through "open" the shell will not wait for the application and it will open the document properly. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-15 13:12, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Yea, that one I picked up a few weeks ago when I first tried to test
 the release builder script on OSX. I couldn't for the life of me figure
 out how to get Finder to show the temp directory, so a little bit of
 web searching led me to that. But I didn't know it worked for files,
 too.

In Path Finder, which I use instead of Finder, I have a menu and toolbar button for showing hidden files.
 The windows version is (for directories only):
 $ explorer .

Didn't know about that.
 Ahh, ok. I knew about bundles, but I didn't know the command line
 didn't do the same special handling for them, too.

It depends on the tool. Most standard Unix tools will treat them as directories. Apple modifies some tools to add Mac specific features. For example, the modified most of the developer tools to add support for universal binaries.
 I see, that's interesting. So it does have a special way to launch an
 app asynchronously without the "&" at the end of the command line. Does
 it also gag stdout/stderr?

No, not if it's launched through "open". Standard Mac application (built with Objective-C using XCode) will use the NSLog function. This prints to a standard log file, which can be view using /Applications/Utilities/Console.app Although cross-platform application may gag out text all over the place. They usually all fail on Mac OS X. No unified toolbar, no dialog sheets and so on.
 Am I correct in assuming "open" is specifically an OSX thing, and not
 something inherited from BSD?

Yes, from the man page: HISTORY First appeared in NextStep. https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man1/open.1.html -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-14 11:43, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 I've tried Total Commander on Windows, which is another program modeled
 after Norton Commander. It's probably the only file manager in the
 world that's even less to my taste than OSX's Finder. However, I do
 keep it around because its multiple-file-renaming tool is freaking
 awesome.

Finder in Mac OS X sucks. In the next version of Mac OS X it's going to get tabs, finally. Actually who cares, I'm already using Path Finder since many years: http://www.cocoatech.com/pathfinder/ -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-15 22:23, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Nice. If I ever end up with another Mac for one reason or another, I'm
 totally getting that program.

Even if it costs money it's totally worth it. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 05:56:50PM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 Am 15.09.2013 16:24, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:04:25AM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:


At the begining of my UNIX days, it was a pleasure to use the usual
set of APIs, which tend to be less convoluted than on Windows.

Then I started looking into X11 programming with Xlib and Motif, and
could not believe that they managed to make it even more complex
than any other desktop graphics programming API!

Once, in college, I had the totally hare-brained idea of *printing* out the Xlib documentation. Through the department's printer service. It came out as a stack of paper 6 *inches* thick (you do the math as to how many pages that is), which I still have today for posterity. :-P T

I can imagine, I remember the stack of books O'Reilley used to sell. The department guys were very happy with you I guess. :)

Hehe... fortunately, the printer service was managed by a dedicated team, and I'm guessing they're pretty used to big jobs every now and then. I did get strange looks from them, though. :-) T -- There are four kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 14.09.2013 00:51, schrieb John Colvin:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:09:36 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 Even on linux, using a Windows .exe tends to work better than using a
 linux binary - exe's just work there thanks to wine, whereas linux
 binaries always have some incompatibility).

As others have mentioned, this is not how linux operates really. In my experience almost everyone either uses a package manager (almost everything) or builds from source (bleeding edge) Downloading executables from peoples websites is definitely a window mindset.

It does not work for commercial UNIX software.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 13.09.2013 23:35, schrieb Walter Bright:
 On 9/13/2013 1:58 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Syntax highlighting hurts my eyes. I've been using vim in black-on-white
 for more than a decade now. (Well, more accurately, black on an almost
 fully saturated off-white, but that's irrelevant.)

I tend to agree. I think syntax highlighting looks better if it's a subtle color change, not a glaring one. Unfortunately, in text mode, color palette is very limited.

I use IDEs with syntax highlighting since MS-DOS days, with Borland product line. For me it is the opposite case, I get lost without colors giving me clues to what is what. -- Paulo
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-14 21:46, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Ugh, I've been convinced for some time that Skype needs to be a
 *service*, not a "service plus god awful proprietary application".

 Maybe they already do, but they *really* need to allow other people to
 write Skype clients. Because they're clearly incompetent at it, and
 while their *service* is great (well, aside from willfully handing all
 your correspondence over to the government without any due process
 whatsoever) their own client applications are by far the biggest
 liability to their own business (aside from the Google-like lack of
 respect for user privacy...but almost nobody cares about that anyway,
 so it's less of a threat to them than their own broken client
 applications are.)

I'm using Adium as a Skype client. But unfortunately the standard Skupe client needs to run as well, which sucks. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 11:06:37AM +0100, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 On Sep 15, 2013 12:50 AM, "Nick Sabalausky" <
 SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:

 That's pretty nice. I'm still not *quite* linux-savvy enough to know
 what I'm doing with chroots (I know about them, but I've never
 actually set one up, and I'd have to look up how to do it.)

It doesn't require much to set one up really. :) I've got a few scripts that builds chroots for Debian testing and unstable for x86, x86_64, X32, and ARM environments (the latter uses QEMU emulation mode to run the binaries on my system).

Debian even has a package (debootstrap) for installing a functional base system onto a filesystem subtree (it's actually used by the installer to initialize a mounted drive that will be serving as root filesystem). It can't get any more convenient than that! :) (Though granted, a full base system install is probably total overkill if all you're looking for is a chroot jail for a single application.) T -- There are three kinds of people in the world: those who can count, and those who can't.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:07:22AM +0200, John Colvin wrote:
 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 01:55:25 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:14:17PM +0200, Dicebot wrote:


Not entirely true. You should never have anything not managed by
package manager on Linux system, it is a reliable road to disaster.
Better distinction is "/usr/" for packages from official repos,
"/usr/local" for own custom packages.

Seriously? I installed unmanaged stuff all the time, and never had much of an issue. Though, granted, I never put them under /usr or /usr/local at all. It's usually in a dedicated subdirectory under $HOME. Installing unmanaged stuff under the /usr tree is tricky business, because when you're trying to *uninstall*, you usually don't remember where all the bits have been scattered, and leaving them lying around can lead to trouble. T

Ever since watching a friend have his entire /usr deleted by a dodgy 'sudo make install', i desperately avoid manually installing to anywhere but a dedicated subdir in $home. No root access needed and I actually know where everything is =)

Yeah, I don't trust random Makefiles I download over the 'Net. I usually put the source trees under /usr/src, which I use mainly for experimental stuff anyway, and since /usr is unwriteable by non-root, the worst a Makefile-gone-wrong can do is to nuke the entire /usr/src, while leaving everything else (esp. the all-important $HOME) intact. These days, though, I hardly ever even run make install anymore. Most apps (that I'm interested in, anyway) can be run as-is from the build directory, or if not, can be manually copied file-by-file to some dedicated target directory (the file list is hand-copied from the output of `make -n`, which also lets me know exactly *what* the thing actually does without actually doing it). Anything more complex than that, and I start weighing how badly I want that app vs. how little I trust it. Usually I don't care badly enough to actually install something that requires running a dodgy Makefile that takes a suspiciously long 20 seconds to install a mere 10-15 files. T -- They say that "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Well I think the gun helps. If you just stood there and yelled BANG, I don't think you'd kill too many people. -- Eddie Izzard, Dressed to Kill
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling parent Matt Soucy <msoucy csh.rit.edu> writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 09/19/2013 05:52 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 06:32:07AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:34:07 -0700
 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 If I have to install libraries not in the apt repository (or
 multiple conflicting versions of the same library), I tend to put it
 either under an entirely different PREFIX, preferably under a
 dedicated subtree for the app I'm trying to build

I had no idea you could do that! That's fantastic: despite my migration towards Linux, I had been worrying about the day I'd inevitable have to deal with multiple versions of the same thing.

=20 Here's something I discovered just today: =20 % apt-cache show stow Package: stow Version: 2.2.0-2 Installed-Size: 672 Maintainer: Chuan-kai Lin <cklin debian.org> Architecture: all Depends: perl, dpkg (>=3D 1.15.4) | install-info Suggests: doc-base Description-en: Organizer for /usr/local software packages GNU Stow is a software installation manager for /usr/local. Using symbolic links, GNU Stow helps you keep the installations separate (/usr/local/stow/emacs vs. /usr/local/stow/perl, for example) while maintaining the illusion that they are all under /usr/local. Description-md5: 952b8725dcbc2ad8368dbc929406052e Homepage: http://www.gnu.org/software/stow/ Tag: implemented-in::perl, interface::commandline, role::program, scope::utility, suite::gnu, use::organizing Section: admin Priority: optional Filename: pool/main/s/stow/stow_2.2.0-2_all.deb Size: 311752 MD5sum: aaf097fd83270ed737484496013711ff SHA1: 45aa26c7240fc89e4e16e9eaa0d04b7670002a7f SHA256: d482cef9da0b755de57d138ed752599230341237ecb7f1e5559533dbd15ab6=

=20
 Pretty cool stuff, so you get to isolate custom-installed software from=

 each other, and still have them work together!
=20
=20
 T
=20

you can isolate just your dotfiles in a git repository (or similar) and stow the parts you want for each box. -Matt Soucy
Sep 19 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 05:36:53AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 02:59:49 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Unless you enjoy spending hours on end removing viruses from your
system. :)

Meh, do you actually review the source of everything you compile? I betcha if I made a makefile install: root_this_box actually_install I could pwn hundreds of linux boxes before the many eyes even took a look at it.

If you were on Windows, I could pwn your box just by sending you an appropriately-crafted email and having Outlook automatically execute an untrusted script without your knowledge or permission, and by you not even needing to open the message, just seeing it in the preview pane. I'm reasonably confident that I'll get a lot more windows boxen than you could get linux boxen. ;-) There are a LOT more windows users who use Outlook without any clue about its security vulnerabilities, than linux users who know how to run make. (But you do have a point about clueless linux users who run make as root without batting an eyelid. They deserve what they get, frankly.)
 (except i used spaces there instead of tabs. Thwarted by make's
 silly syntax once again!)

I hate make. It's an antiquated hack on top of a patch on top of a nave implementation of a simple design stretched far, far beyond its original intentions. Do yourself a favor and use a *real* build system. Like SCons, or tup. Or the many other alternatives out there. T -- My program has no bugs! Only unintentional features...
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 06:03:01AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 02:56:52 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
So then recompile after you do a distribution upgrade.

Of course there's ways around it, but talk about an enormous hassle.
I'll be sure to look, but one bad thing doesn't mean everything's
bad

Like I said, I've been a Linux user for a long time, and that's by choice! But I still envy a lot of what Windows gets right and still long for the good old days of DOS where it was just you, the hardware, and a little tiny helper library that was there if you needed it.

I remember those days too. :) But I dunno, IME, when Windows 3.1 came along, it had so many gratuitous limitations that I said to myself, this sucks! So now I can't have direct access to hardware in the name of "protection", and what do I get in return? Nothing but being straitjacketed into a system that can't even do what I want. So I stuck with DOS until Win95 came along, and it became pretty clear that the days of DOS are numbered. I hated Win95 just as much for the same reasons: the hood was welded shut in the name of "protection", but little protection was actually offered, and a lot of lack of functionality. I clung on to DOS until its dying days, then somebody suggested Linux. I wasn't too pleased to hear that either -- I had been using Solaris in my CS classes in college, and I wasn't particularly impressed with it. But I did decide to try it. I gave up after a while, 'cos of the sheer difficulty of actually installing a system that worked (this was in the days before linux installers existed.) Some time later, as all hopes of DOS-style programming faded away, I decided to seriously look into finding a Linux distro that I could live with. I chose Debian. It was a bit of a challenge to get it to work -- this was before the days of apt-get. But when I finally did get it to work, I was actually quite pleased with it. It offered one thing that Windows and most of the other distros at the time offered: the ability to install a bare minimum system that could still function without *requiring* X11, and (the beginnings of) a sane package management system that doesn't suck -- I could, for example, specify that I *don't* want fvwm (which was all the rage at one point) installed by default, and the packaging system would actually take that and *work* with it instead of saying "you don't want the defaults? OK, then you're on your own, if it breaks, you get to keep the pieces", like most other distros were doing at the time. It allowed me to select a different default shell from bash without totally collapsing into a heap of mess, unlike some other distros that I tried, that simply assumed /bin/sh == /bin/bash. Anyway, long story short, I found that while Linux, like any other modern OS, required sacrificing some flexibility -- you don't deal directly with the hardware anymore -- it also offered a lot in return: protection of programs from each other, so that X11 crashing (which was a frequent occurrence in those days) doesn't bring down the entire system, and typing the wrong command as a user won't delete system files. Customizability. The ability to reach inside the innards of the system and modify stuff. Personalize it to the point nobody else knows how to use the system. Sure, things weren't perfect. But at least you had the fighting chance to do something about it. Whereas on Windows, I had to sacrifice the same flexibility, yet what I get in return was a system that can be easily brought down by a misbehaving program, typing the wrong command(s) can delete system files and require a full reinstallation, a straitjacketed "you-have-to-use-a-GUI-or-else" design mentality that makes it impossible to customize things without literally *everything* breaking left right and center, and a hood that's welded shut 'cos obviously you, a puny user, aren't qualified to look under the hood, and sure as heck don't know how to *fix* anything the MS couldn't fix. For all of its flaws, I still prefer the freedom of choice I get with Linux. I never looked back ever since.
if you remember the days when you'd be listening to music but
couldn't hear any sounds from sauerbraten

Actually, that's still the way things are on my system (there is the alsa stuff, but the OSS emulation actually works better. Get that.).... and over the years, I've come to see it as a feature! See, I would keep one program running just to thwart random Flash crap from spewing noise. Now I use noscript, but still I've come to like locking the speakers with another program.

o_O What system *are* you using?? I've been using Debian's default ALSA installation for the last, oh, decade? -- and I've never had a problem with two (or more!) programs simultaneously producing sounds getting perfectly blended together without any one locking out the other. In fact, I've actually tried spawning 50-odd copies of mpg123 before, and it actually manages to blend ALL of the outputs without any sign of distortion. I'm honestly quite surprised you're having so much trouble with it. It's like your system was frozen in time in 1998 when these things were still being sorted out (judging by the fact you still use OSS), 'cos that was about the last time I remember having issues of this sort. No wonder you're having issues that none of the rest of us linuxers experience, if you insist on using 15 y.o. software that hasn't been maintained for who knows how long. ;) T -- Why can't you just be a nonconformist like everyone else? -- YHL
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 06:32:07AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:34:07 -0700
 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 If I have to install libraries not in the apt repository (or
 multiple conflicting versions of the same library), I tend to put it
 either under an entirely different PREFIX, preferably under a
 dedicated subtree for the app I'm trying to build

I had no idea you could do that! That's fantastic: despite my migration towards Linux, I had been worrying about the day I'd inevitable have to deal with multiple versions of the same thing.

In spite of all my rants against autotools, it *does* let you do cool things like: ./configure --prefix=/path/to/my/dedicated/sandbox which, if things were properly put together, will setup the Makefile such that make install will install to /path/to/my/dedicated/sandbox instead of the usual system directories. Of course, then you need to setup $PATH and maybe a few other environment variables expected by the app to get things to work properly, but this is the way I usually like to install custom built-from-source apps. That way, should I want to uninstall it, I can just nuke the entire root directory dedicated for that app without damaging anything else. :) But wait, there's more... On Debian, a good number of library packages are actually *designed* to support installation of multiple versions simultaneously. Even fragile, sensitive giants like gcc that have an intricate web of library dependencies can have 4.6, 4.7, *and* 4.8 all installed together side-by-side (up to a certain point, of course). A good many libraries have been patched downstream by Debian developers to have proper soname correspondence with ABI changes, and the upstream version number is encoded into the package name (as opposed to just the package version number) so installing multiple versions of the same library is actually *officially* supported. So the above prefix trick is really only necessary if you're building the library yourself.
 Hence my first comment: I prefer to just grab the Windows version
 and run it in wine. That usually just works.

I dunno, wine doesn't seem to like my GUI configuration (or lack thereof :-P). It just falters in its steps and gasps every now and then, that I don't trust that whatever program it's running is actually doing what it should be doing. I still rather build from source.

I find GUI apps to be butt-ugly under wine ;) But often usable otherwise (not that I've used it much so far).

I suppose so. Well, fair enough. :) T -- They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work. -- Russian saying
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 04:49:23AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
[...]
 and as long as skype can pick up my voice and transmit the other
 person's voice, that's good enough.
 

Is the Skype software any less dreadful on Linux than it is on Windows?

Nope. It's worse, actually. Linux support is spotty, and there have been debacles where Linux support was under consideration to be dropped. Fortunately, they didn't. But it tends to fall behind the Windows version, so weird quirks may pop up every now and then. Plus, it's *still* a 32-bit app. :-( Having said that, though, the latest incarnation of the Linux version actually has native Debian packages, which makes the ordeal a lot less painful than before, when you have to manually hunt down dependent libraries.
 It used to be that even the close button doesn't work properly, *by
 design*. But last I looked, the damn thing no longer even *allowed*
 you to end the glitchy resource-draining process *at all*. And that's
 just one small aspect of the program.

Fortunately, in Linux there's 'killall -9 skype'. :) Well, that's usually not necessary, since selecting "exit" from the main menu (as opposed to merely closing the window) actually does logout *and* terminate the skype process.
 I love the Skype service, but (at least on windows) the software seems
 committed to forging new ground in "crapware". The android version
 didn't seem nearly as bad though, but even that had a *lot* of user
 comments posted about its overall quality and reliability taking a
 steep nosedive. That was about a year ago though.

You will probably not be very pleased with the Linux version either, then. :) But at least, recent versions have gotten their act together and can now do a saner job of detecting your camera/microphone devices. It used to be very unreliable and required lots of manual tweaking and babysitting. T -- Public parking: euphemism for paid parking. -- Flora
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 06:57:23 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 decided to seriously look into finding a Linux distro that I 
 could live with. I chose Debian.

I went with Slackware when I started, actually due to the zipslack thing, and then never looked back. You might say "well there's your problem" cuz slack doesn't use package managers. But I've spent enough time on debian and centOS that my opinion of package managers hasn't changed at all: nice when they work, but they don't most the time. The biggest culture hit for me the first time I did use them though was the -devel libraries. On Slackware, all libraries are devel, they just do it all together. And really, why wouldn't you? This is linux! (and we are KLINGONS! sorry i couldnt resist) But slackware packages are simple and to the point. They're just tarballs with everything you need (except recursive dependencies, but you usually already have them - assuming you can actually find a slackware package, getting rarer each year, sadly - they are built against the core system and tend to work well). Still not my *ideal* system, but despite my complaining, I actually do like it. The biggest problem is nowadays everyone does deb and rpm instead.
 Windows and most of the other distros at the time offered: the 
 ability to install a bare minimum system that could still 
 function without *requiring* X11

oh god X11 was too brutally slow to use on an older computer anyway. Windows 95 was actually fast.
 Anyway, long story short, I found that while Linux, like any 
 other modern OS, required sacrificing some flexibility -- you 
 don't deal directly with the hardware anymore

There was vm86 mode though... I got this program DOSEmu that did that and it rocked. But now I'm on 64 bit. Actually though now there's the whole qemu/kvm virtualization stuff who's potential I really don't think has been fully explored. Not only could you run programs for other systems, but you could also potentially sandbox them really well, better than user accounts and processes alone.
 o_O What system *are* you using?? I've been using Debian's 
 default ALSA installation for the last, oh, decade?

I actually use ALSA too, but some of the programs are OSS emulation (which rocks btw. Ever try to program ALSA? What a piece of shit, oss works the way it should, just write some crap to /dev/dsp). If I opt in to the alsa programs they mix sounds fine, but there's more latency. Not a problem sometimes, but it bugs me other times, and besides, like I said I think locking the audio device is sometimes a feature rather than a bug. But still, it's ridiculous, they should have just fixed OSS back then to mix and keep up with the drivers (someone did! but they made it closed source so linux couldn't look at it. But the FreeBSD people fixed oss too.) There are some weird system things too though. The ALSA volume control (alsamixer to interface with it, but it is in the system itself) is really weird. Most the values don't seem to do anything on my new hardware. On my old motherboard, the volume control worked like you'd expect. Master has a wide range, PCM had a wide range, they'd work together. My new motherboard is weird. PCM does virtually nothing. Master works well from about 20 to 80, but setting it to zero doesn't actually silence it (usually) and going to 100 just distorts it. I guess distortion is expected with digital audio maxing out, but my old mobo didn't do it. Now, on the bright side, at least alsa actually works now. When I was doing it ten years ago, that was a huge victory.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 15:38:54 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe 
wrote:
 My new motherboard is weird. PCM does virtually nothing. Master 
 works well from about 20 to 80, but setting it to zero doesn't 
 actually silence it (usually) and going to 100 just distorts 
 it. I guess distortion is expected with digital audio maxing 
 out, but my old mobo didn't do it.

Something is very wrong there. There's very little excuse for a digital master volume control that can cause clipping.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Paolo Invernizzi" <paolo.invernizzi gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 19:46:29 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:

 Ugh, I've been convinced for some time that Skype needs to be a
 *service*, not a "service plus god awful proprietary 
 application".

 Maybe they already do, but they *really* need to allow other 
 people to
 write Skype clients. Because they're clearly incompetent at it, 
 and
 while their *service* is great (well, aside from willfully 
 handing all
 your correspondence over to the government without any due 
 process
 whatsoever) their own client applications are by far the biggest
 liability to their own business (aside from the Google-like 
 lack of
 respect for user privacy...but almost nobody cares about that 
 anyway,
 so it's less of a threat to them than their own broken client
 applications are.)

That /was/ possible, and our company is using the engine /naked/ on linux, but... https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA12322/what-is-skypekit Now MS is ending that game, or at least it seems so. - Paolo
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--047d7bb0425248094004e6693eae
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 15, 2013 12:50 AM, "Nick Sabalausky" <
SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 03:52:39 -0700
 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 06:32:07AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:34:07 -0700
 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 If I have to install libraries not in the apt repository (or
 multiple conflicting versions of the same library), I tend to put
 it either under an entirely different PREFIX, preferably under a
 dedicated subtree for the app I'm trying to build

I had no idea you could do that! That's fantastic: despite my migration towards Linux, I had been worrying about the day I'd inevitable have to deal with multiple versions of the same thing.

In spite of all my rants against autotools, it *does* let you do cool things like: ./configure --prefix=/path/to/my/dedicated/sandbox which, if things were properly put together, will setup the Makefile such that make install will install to /path/to/my/dedicated/sandbox instead of the usual system directories. Of course, then you need to setup $PATH and maybe a few other environment variables expected by the app to get things to work properly, but this is the way I usually like to install custom built-from-source apps. That way, should I want to uninstall it, I can just nuke the entire root directory dedicated for that app without damaging anything else. :) But wait, there's more... On Debian, a good number of library packages are actually *designed* to support installation of multiple versions simultaneously. Even fragile, sensitive giants like gcc that have an intricate web of library dependencies can have 4.6, 4.7, *and* 4.8 all installed together side-by-side (up to a certain point, of course). A good many libraries have been patched downstream by Debian developers to have proper soname correspondence with ABI changes, and the upstream version number is encoded into the package name (as opposed to just the package version number) so installing multiple versions of the same library is actually *officially* supported.

That's pretty nice. I'm still not *quite* linux-savvy enough to know what I'm doing with chroots (I know about them, but I've never actually set one up, and I'd have to look up how to do it.)

It doesn't require much to set one up really. :) I've got a few scripts that builds chroots for Debian testing and unstable for x86, x86_64, X32, and ARM environments (the latter uses QEMU emulation mode to run the binaries on my system). Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --047d7bb0425248094004e6693eae Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 15, 2013 12:50 AM, &quot;Nick Sabalausky&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto= :SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com">SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com</= a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 03:52:39 -0700<br> &gt; &quot;H. S. Teoh&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx">h= steoh quickfur.ath.cx</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 06:32:07AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:<= br> &gt; &gt; &gt; On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:34:07 -0700<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &quot;H. S. Teoh&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:hsteoh quickfur= .ath.cx">hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; [...]<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; If I have to install libraries not in the apt repositor= y (or<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; multiple conflicting versions of the same library), I t= end to put<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; it either under an entirely different PREFIX, preferabl= y under a<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; dedicated subtree for the app I&#39;m trying to build<b= r> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; I had no idea you could do that! That&#39;s fantastic: despi= te my<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; migration towards Linux, I had been worrying about the day I= &#39;d<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; inevitable have to deal with multiple versions of the same t= hing.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; In spite of all my rants against autotools, it *does* let you do = cool<br> &gt; &gt; things like:<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; =A0 =A0 =A0 ./configure --prefix=3D/path/to/my/dedicated/sandbox<= br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; which, if things were properly put together, will setup the Makef= ile<br> &gt; &gt; such that make install will install to /path/to/my/dedicated/sand= box<br> &gt; &gt; instead of the usual system directories.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; Of course, then you need to setup $PATH and maybe a few other<br> &gt; &gt; environment variables expected by the app to get things to work<b= r> &gt; &gt; properly, but this is the way I usually like to install custom<br=

I can<br> &gt; &gt; just nuke the entire root directory dedicated for that app withou= t<br> &gt; &gt; damaging anything else. :)<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; But wait, there&#39;s more...<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; On Debian, a good number of library packages are actually *design= ed*<br> &gt; &gt; to support installation of multiple versions simultaneously. Even= <br> &gt; &gt; fragile, sensitive giants like gcc that have an intricate web of<= br> &gt; &gt; library dependencies can have 4.6, 4.7, *and* 4.8 all installed<b= r> &gt; &gt; together side-by-side (up to a certain point, of course). A good = many<br> &gt; &gt; libraries have been patched downstream by Debian developers to ha= ve<br> &gt; &gt; proper soname correspondence with ABI changes, and the upstream<b= r> &gt; &gt; version number is encoded into the package name (as opposed to ju= st<br> &gt; &gt; the package version number) so installing multiple versions of th= e<br> &gt; &gt; same library is actually *officially* supported.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; That&#39;s pretty nice. I&#39;m still not *quite* linux-savvy enough t= o know<br> &gt; what I&#39;m doing with chroots (I know about them, but I&#39;ve never= <br> &gt; actually set one up, and I&#39;d have to look up how to do it.)<br> &gt;</p> <p>It doesn&#39;t require much to set one up really.=A0 :)</p> <p>I&#39;ve got a few scripts that builds chroots for Debian testing and un= stable for x86, x86_64, X32, and ARM environments (the latter uses QEMU emu= lation mode to run the binaries on my system).</p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;<br> </p> --047d7bb0425248094004e6693eae--
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:14:17PM +0200, Dicebot wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 10:32:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
 wrote:
My understanding (purely from the link below) was that /usr/local/*
was *specifically* for non-package-managered stuff, whereas /usr/*
was *specifically* for package-managered things:

http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/8656/usr-bin-vs-usr-local-bin-on-linux

Not entirely true. You should never have anything not managed by package manager on Linux system, it is a reliable road to disaster. Better distinction is "/usr/" for packages from official repos, "/usr/local" for own custom packages.

Seriously? I installed unmanaged stuff all the time, and never had much of an issue. Though, granted, I never put them under /usr or /usr/local at all. It's usually in a dedicated subdirectory under $HOME. Installing unmanaged stuff under the /usr tree is tricky business, because when you're trying to *uninstall*, you usually don't remember where all the bits have been scattered, and leaving them lying around can lead to trouble. T -- Without geometry, life would be pointless. -- VS
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Sunday, September 15, 2013 18:53:58 H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:14:17PM +0200, Dicebot wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 10:32:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
 
 wrote:
My understanding (purely from the link below) was that /usr/local/*
was *specifically* for non-package-managered stuff, whereas /usr/*
was *specifically* for package-managered things:

http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/8656/usr-bin-vs-usr-local-bin-on-> >
>linux> 

package manager on Linux system, it is a reliable road to disaster. Better distinction is "/usr/" for packages from official repos, "/usr/local" for own custom packages.

Seriously? I installed unmanaged stuff all the time, and never had much of an issue. Though, granted, I never put them under /usr or /usr/local at all. It's usually in a dedicated subdirectory under $HOME. Installing unmanaged stuff under the /usr tree is tricky business, because when you're trying to *uninstall*, you usually don't remember where all the bits have been scattered, and leaving them lying around can lead to trouble.

Which is exactly why you shouldn't do it normally. If fact, I would argue that you should pretty much _never_ install stuff not managed by the package manager in /usr. /usr/local is a different matter, because it's not usually managed by the package manager, but you still have to be very careful with it. Putting unmanaged stuff in dedicated subdirectories in $HOME is definitely a better approach. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 06:59:24PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Sunday, September 15, 2013 18:53:58 H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:14:17PM +0200, Dicebot wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 10:32:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
 wrote:
My understanding (purely from the link below) was that
/usr/local/* was *specifically* for non-package-managered stuff,
whereas /usr/* was *specifically* for package-managered things:

http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/8656/usr-bin-vs-usr-local-bin-on-> >
>linux> 

package manager on Linux system, it is a reliable road to disaster. Better distinction is "/usr/" for packages from official repos, "/usr/local" for own custom packages.

Seriously? I installed unmanaged stuff all the time, and never had much of an issue. Though, granted, I never put them under /usr or /usr/local at all. It's usually in a dedicated subdirectory under $HOME. Installing unmanaged stuff under the /usr tree is tricky business, because when you're trying to *uninstall*, you usually don't remember where all the bits have been scattered, and leaving them lying around can lead to trouble.

Which is exactly why you shouldn't do it normally. If fact, I would argue that you should pretty much _never_ install stuff not managed by the package manager in /usr. /usr/local is a different matter, because it's not usually managed by the package manager, but you still have to be very careful with it. Putting unmanaged stuff in dedicated subdirectories in $HOME is definitely a better approach.

For unmanaged stuff, I usually prefer to put each application in their own filesystem subtree, like /usr/src/${appname}/root (which is also just next to where I usually build the source to begin with), instead of mixing everything together like in /usr or /usr/local. That way, if something misbehaves, I can just use `rm -rf` to kill it off without needing to dig through /usr/local/bin, /usr/local/share/man/man*, /usr/local/lib, /usr/local/share, and who knows where else to find all the bits to clean up. T -- Acid falls with the rain; with love comes the pain.
Sep 15 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-16 16:28, H. S. Teoh wrote:

 Which reminds me... it's probably time to make backups of $HOME again...

Just push them to internet and someone will make the backups for you :) -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 16 2013
parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/16/2013 8:02 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
 On 2013-09-16 16:28, H. S. Teoh wrote:

 Which reminds me... it's probably time to make backups of $HOME again...

Just push them to internet and someone will make the backups for you :)

Since the taxpayers already pay for an NSA backup of all our files, I think they should kindly provide a restore service!
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--001a11c2fc0efb2fc204e67b4cca
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 16, 2013 4:55 AM, "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 06:59:24PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Sunday, September 15, 2013 18:53:58 H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:14:17PM +0200, Dicebot wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 10:32:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
 wrote:
My understanding (purely from the link below) was that
/usr/local/* was *specifically* for non-package-managered stuff,
whereas /usr/* was *specifically* for package-managered things:





linux>
 Not entirely true. You should never have anything not managed by
 package manager on Linux system, it is a reliable road to
 disaster.  Better distinction is "/usr/" for packages from
 official repos, "/usr/local" for own custom packages.

Seriously? I installed unmanaged stuff all the time, and never had much of an issue. Though, granted, I never put them under /usr or /usr/local at all. It's usually in a dedicated subdirectory under $HOME. Installing unmanaged stuff under the /usr tree is tricky business, because when you're trying to *uninstall*, you usually don't remember where all the bits have been scattered, and leaving them lying around can lead to trouble.

Which is exactly why you shouldn't do it normally. If fact, I would argue that you should pretty much _never_ install stuff not managed by the package manager in /usr. /usr/local is a different matter, because it's not usually managed by the package manager, but you still have to be very careful with it. Putting unmanaged stuff in dedicated subdirectories in $HOME is definitely a better approach.

For unmanaged stuff, I usually prefer to put each application in their own filesystem subtree, like /usr/src/${appname}/root (which is also just next to where I usually build the source to begin with), instead of mixing everything together like in /usr or /usr/local. That way, if something misbehaves, I can just use `rm -rf` to kill it off without needing to dig through /usr/local/bin, /usr/local/share/man/man*, /usr/local/lib, /usr/local/share, and who knows where else to find all the bits to clean up.

For some reason I use /opt/usr or /opt/${appname} Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --001a11c2fc0efb2fc204e67b4cca Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 16, 2013 4:55 AM, &quot;H. S. Teoh&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:hsteo= h quickfur.ath.cx">hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 06:59:24PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; On Sunday, September 15, 2013 18:53:58 H. S. Teoh wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:14:17PM +0200, Dicebot wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 10:32:26 UTC, Nick Sa= balausky<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;My understanding (purely from the link below) was t= hat<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;/usr/local/* was *specifically* for non-package-man= agered stuff,<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;whereas /usr/* was *specifically* for package-manag= ered things:<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;<a href=3D"http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/= 8656/usr-bin-vs-usr-local-bin-on-">http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/= 8656/usr-bin-vs-usr-local-bin-on-</a>&gt; &gt; &gt;linux&gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Not entirely true. You should never have anything not m= anaged by<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; package manager on Linux system, it is a reliable road = to<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; disaster. =A0Better distinction is &quot;/usr/&quot; fo= r packages from<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; official repos, &quot;/usr/local&quot; for own custom p= ackages.<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; Seriously? I installed unmanaged stuff all the time, and nev= er had<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; much of an issue. Though, granted, I never put them under /u= sr or<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; /usr/local at all. It&#39;s usually in a dedicated subdirect= ory under<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; $HOME.<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; Installing unmanaged stuff under the /usr tree is tricky bus= iness,<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; because when you&#39;re trying to *uninstall*, you usually d= on&#39;t<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; remember where all the bits have been scattered, and leaving= them<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; lying around can lead to trouble.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; Which is exactly why you shouldn&#39;t do it normally. If fact, I= would<br> &gt; &gt; argue that you should pretty much _never_ install stuff not manag= ed by<br> &gt; &gt; the package manager in /usr. /usr/local is a different matter, be= cause<br> &gt; &gt; it&#39;s not usually managed by the package manager, but you stil= l have to<br> &gt; &gt; be very careful with it. Putting unmanaged stuff in dedicated<br> &gt; &gt; subdirectories in $HOME is definitely a better approach.<br> &gt; [...]<br> &gt;<br> &gt; For unmanaged stuff, I usually prefer to put each application in their= <br> &gt; own filesystem subtree, like /usr/src/${appname}/root (which is also<b= r> &gt; just next to where I usually build the source to begin with), instead = of<br> &gt; mixing everything together like in /usr or /usr/local. That way, if<br=

r> &gt; needing to dig through /usr/local/bin, /usr/local/share/man/man*,<br> &gt; /usr/local/lib, /usr/local/share, and who knows where else to find all= <br> &gt; the bits to clean up.<br> &gt;</p> <p>For some reason I use /opt/usr or /opt/${appname} </p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;<br> </p> --001a11c2fc0efb2fc204e67b4cca--
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 07:39:29 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 For some reason I use /opt/usr or /opt/${appname}

 Regards

As far as I understand, "/opt" is recommended by FHS for such stuff.
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 01:55:25 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:14:17PM +0200, Dicebot wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 10:32:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
 wrote:
My understanding (purely from the link below) was that 
/usr/local/*
was *specifically* for non-package-managered stuff, whereas 
/usr/*
was *specifically* for package-managered things:

http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/8656/usr-bin-vs-usr-local-bin-on-linux

Not entirely true. You should never have anything not managed by package manager on Linux system, it is a reliable road to disaster. Better distinction is "/usr/" for packages from official repos, "/usr/local" for own custom packages.

Seriously? I installed unmanaged stuff all the time, and never had much of an issue. Though, granted, I never put them under /usr or /usr/local at all. It's usually in a dedicated subdirectory under $HOME. Installing unmanaged stuff under the /usr tree is tricky business, because when you're trying to *uninstall*, you usually don't remember where all the bits have been scattered, and leaving them lying around can lead to trouble. T

Ever since watching a friend have his entire /usr deleted by a dodgy 'sudo make install', i desperately avoid manually installing to anywhere but a dedicated subdir in $home. No root access needed and I actually know where everything is =)
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 08:07:23 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
 Ever since watching a friend have his entire /usr deleted by a 
 dodgy 'sudo make install', i desperately avoid manually 
 installing to anywhere but a dedicated subdir in $home. No root 
 access needed and I actually know where everything is =)

I always create PKGBUILD's for stuff I need to install. Event it is a tiny one shot thing. And the fact that it automatically will run install script in contained sandbox is one of the major decision factors here (even placing in $home can destroy your home if makefile author is sloppy enough)
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 10:10:32 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 08:07:23 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
 Ever since watching a friend have his entire /usr deleted by a 
 dodgy 'sudo make install', i desperately avoid manually 
 installing to anywhere but a dedicated subdir in $home. No 
 root access needed and I actually know where everything is =)

I always create PKGBUILD's for stuff I need to install. Event it is a tiny one shot thing. And the fact that it automatically will run install script in contained sandbox is one of the major decision factors here (even placing in $home can destroy your home if makefile author is sloppy enough)

Seeing as I'm typing this from my newly set-up Arch64 installation, I suspect I might go down that route too =) Btw, compltely off-topic, do you have any recomendations for an AUR helper?
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 10:35:08 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 10:10:32 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 08:07:23 UTC, John Colvin 
 wrote:
 Ever since watching a friend have his entire /usr deleted by 
 a dodgy 'sudo make install', i desperately avoid manually 
 installing to anywhere but a dedicated subdir in $home. No 
 root access needed and I actually know where everything is =)

I always create PKGBUILD's for stuff I need to install. Event it is a tiny one shot thing. And the fact that it automatically will run install script in contained sandbox is one of the major decision factors here (even placing in $home can destroy your home if makefile author is sloppy enough)

Seeing as I'm typing this from my newly set-up Arch64 installation, I suspect I might go down that route too =) Btw, compltely off-topic, do you have any recomendations for an AUR helper?

I got used to yaourt when it was basically the only option :) I don't even know what others are to be honest P)
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
I wish unix had a recursive user system. Where each user is root 
of its own little domain.

Then each app I install would just be suid to a child user that 
has access only to its own little installation subdirectory. If 
it wants to write to my regular home, it can sudo back to my 
other user.

It'd save the dangers of one account for everything that matters 
(the difference between me and root is fairly irrelevant - if 
root's files get messed up, I can just reinstall them from the 
cd. If my files get messed up, that's a real hassle!)
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 03:52:21PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 I wish unix had a recursive user system. Where each user is root of
 its own little domain.

That's a neat idea. It's probably not hard to implement in Linux... but I'm no kernel hacker so I wouldn't know where to start.
 Then each app I install would just be suid to a child user that has
 access only to its own little installation subdirectory. If it wants
 to write to my regular home, it can sudo back to my other user.
 
 It'd save the dangers of one account for everything that matters
 (the difference between me and root is fairly irrelevant - if root's
 files get messed up, I can just reinstall them from the cd. If my
 files get messed up, that's a real hassle!)

True! My older projects are on subversion hosted on a remote server, so that serves as a crude kind of backup, but my newer projects (mostly D stuff) are all on git, and if I lose $HOME, all of them will be gone for good!! Which reminds me... it's probably time to make backups of $HOME again... T -- In order to understand recursion you must first understand recursion.
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 13:52:22 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 I wish unix had a recursive user system. Where each user is 
 root of its own little domain.

 Then each app I install would just be suid to a child user that 
 has access only to its own little installation subdirectory. If 
 it wants to write to my regular home, it can sudo back to my 
 other user.

 It'd save the dangers of one account for everything that 
 matters (the difference between me and root is fairly 
 irrelevant - if root's files get messed up, I can just 
 reinstall them from the cd. If my files get messed up, that's a 
 real hassle!)

It can be an interesting core idea for new Linux distro :) Well, after some polishing of app inter-operation of course.
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 16 September 2013 16:02, Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:
 On 2013-09-16 16:28, H. S. Teoh wrote:

 Which reminds me... it's probably time to make backups of $HOME again...

Just push them to internet and someone will make the backups for you :)

The NSA keeps a backup of your $HOME. :-) </troll> http://boingboing.net/2013/09/01/hello-nsa-i-have-lost-an-e.html -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Johannes Pfau" <spam example.com> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 13:52:22 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 I wish unix had a recursive user system. Where each user is 
 root of its own little domain.

 Then each app I install would just be suid to a child user that 
 has access only to its own little installation subdirectory. If 
 it wants to write to my regular home, it can sudo back to my 
 other user.

 It'd save the dangers of one account for everything that 
 matters (the difference between me and root is fairly 
 irrelevant - if root's files get messed up, I can just 
 reinstall them from the cd. If my files get messed up, that's a 
 real hassle!)

Thats what selinux or other MACs are for. No need to set up more user accounts, just limit the application's permissions.
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 19:59:06 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
 Thats what selinux or other MACs are for. No need to set up 
 more user accounts, just limit the application's permissions.

I've found selinux to be pretty hard to use with what little I've done with it... user accounts are simple.
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:24:49 -0700
Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 On 9/16/2013 8:02 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
 On 2013-09-16 16:28, H. S. Teoh wrote:

 Which reminds me... it's probably time to make backups of $HOME
 again...

Just push them to internet and someone will make the backups for you :)

Since the taxpayers already pay for an NSA backup of all our files, I think they should kindly provide a restore service!

Hah! Classic :)
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Peter Williams <pwil3058 bigpond.net.au> writes:
On 16/09/13 18:07, John Colvin wrote:
 Ever since watching a friend have his entire /usr deleted by a dodgy
 'sudo make install', i desperately avoid manually installing to anywhere
 but a dedicated subdir in $home. No root access needed and I actually
 know where everything is =)

In order for users of my PyGTK scripts to not have to risk the integrity of their system (by installing them from my source rather than through their package manager), I go out of my way to make sure that all that is required is for the source directory to be in their $PATH (or alternatively run them with the full path to the executable) in order for them to be usable. Because Python scripts know the directory where they're installed (as well as where they're run from) it's possible to know where to look for any support files using this data and Python automatically includes the installed directory and its subdirectory when it looks for library packages/modules. This saves me the bother of having to learn how to make packages for all the different systems out there without asking the user to compromise their system integrity. Peter PS I also provide an install script so the users have that option and the location of the root directory for the installation is configurable.
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, 2013-09-16 at 11:24 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
 On 9/16/2013 8:02 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
 On 2013-09-16 16:28, H. S. Teoh wrote:

 Which reminds me... it's probably time to make backups of $HOME again.=



 Just push them to internet and someone will make the backups for you :)

Since the taxpayers already pay for an NSA backup of all our files, I thi=

 should kindly provide a restore service!

Dilbert made use of this, found himself being taken to prison=E2=80=A6 http://dilbert.com/2013-09-06/ =E2=80=A6 but read on for the denouement. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Sep 17 2013
prev sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 06:32:07AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:34:07 -0700
 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 If I have to install libraries not in the apt repository (or
 multiple conflicting versions of the same library), I tend to put it
 either under an entirely different PREFIX, preferably under a
 dedicated subtree for the app I'm trying to build

I had no idea you could do that! That's fantastic: despite my migration towards Linux, I had been worrying about the day I'd inevitable have to deal with multiple versions of the same thing.

Here's something I discovered just today: % apt-cache show stow Package: stow Version: 2.2.0-2 Installed-Size: 672 Maintainer: Chuan-kai Lin <cklin debian.org> Architecture: all Depends: perl, dpkg (>= 1.15.4) | install-info Suggests: doc-base Description-en: Organizer for /usr/local software packages GNU Stow is a software installation manager for /usr/local. Using symbolic links, GNU Stow helps you keep the installations separate (/usr/local/stow/emacs vs. /usr/local/stow/perl, for example) while maintaining the illusion that they are all under /usr/local. Description-md5: 952b8725dcbc2ad8368dbc929406052e Homepage: http://www.gnu.org/software/stow/ Tag: implemented-in::perl, interface::commandline, role::program, scope::utility, suite::gnu, use::organizing Section: admin Priority: optional Filename: pool/main/s/stow/stow_2.2.0-2_all.deb Size: 311752 MD5sum: aaf097fd83270ed737484496013711ff SHA1: 45aa26c7240fc89e4e16e9eaa0d04b7670002a7f SHA256: d482cef9da0b755de57d138ed752599230341237ecb7f1e5559533dbd15ab619 Pretty cool stuff, so you get to isolate custom-installed software from each other, and still have them work together! T -- Do not reason with the unreasonable; you lose by definition.
Sep 19 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/13/2013 1:46 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
 Do you actually write significant amounts of code on remote machines? I'm
 struggling to find a reason to do that.

Also keep in mind the ME's bandwidth requirements are very very small, so it is snappy even on a miserably slow connection. (It was designed in the day of 300 baud modems.)
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 23:55:55 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 But I dunno, IME, when Windows 3.1 came
 along, it had so many gratuitous limitations that I said to myself,
 this sucks! So now I can't have direct access to hardware in the name
 of "protection", and what do I get in return? Nothing but being
 straitjacketed into a system that can't even do what I want.

OMG, iOS and Android == Win 3.1! Why did I never notice that before!
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 03:59:36 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 04:49:23AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 [...]
 and as long as skype can pick up my voice and transmit the other
 person's voice, that's good enough.
 

Is the Skype software any less dreadful on Linux than it is on Windows?

Nope. It's worse, actually. Linux support is spotty, and there have been debacles where Linux support was under consideration to be dropped. Fortunately, they didn't. But it tends to fall behind the Windows version, so weird quirks may pop up every now and then. Plus, it's *still* a 32-bit app. :-(

Ugh, I've been convinced for some time that Skype needs to be a *service*, not a "service plus god awful proprietary application". Maybe they already do, but they *really* need to allow other people to write Skype clients. Because they're clearly incompetent at it, and while their *service* is great (well, aside from willfully handing all your correspondence over to the government without any due process whatsoever) their own client applications are by far the biggest liability to their own business (aside from the Google-like lack of respect for user privacy...but almost nobody cares about that anyway, so it's less of a threat to them than their own broken client applications are.)
 
 It used to be that even the close button doesn't work properly, *by
 design*. But last I looked, the damn thing no longer even *allowed*
 you to end the glitchy resource-draining process *at all*. And
 that's just one small aspect of the program.

Fortunately, in Linux there's 'killall -9 skype'. :) Well, that's usually not necessary, since selecting "exit" from the main menu (as opposed to merely closing the window) actually does logout *and* terminate the skype process.

That's what the Windows version *used* to be like, back when it was *less* terrible. Last I saw, the damn thing didn't even *have* an "exit" command anymore.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 17:38:52 +0200
"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:

 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 06:57:23 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Windows and most of the other distros at the time offered: the 
 ability to install a bare minimum system that could still 
 function without *requiring* X11

oh god X11 was too brutally slow to use on an older computer anyway. Windows 95 was actually fast.

My first introduction to Linux was around 2001 with Mandrake and Red Hat (the two main "newbie-friendly" distros at the time). I couldn't believe how insanely sllloooooow Nautilus was compared to Win98 and Win2k on the same hardware. Plus, the X11 installation kept completely destroying itself for no apparent reason. One day, a few weeks after the most recent from-scratch OS installation, X would just simply decide not to start. And I never could manage to fix it without yet another OS re-installation. That, plus the constant tinkering, the awful state of pre-apt/yum packages, and the attitudes of many Linux users at the time left me swearing off Linux and running back to Windows until several years later when I finally gave it another try with "This new Ubuntu thing everyone seems to be talking about." Boy have things improved. Not perfect, granted, but far better than I had ever expected.
 
 Actually though now there's the whole qemu/kvm virtualization 
 stuff who's potential I really don't think has been fully 
 explored.

I feel exactly the same way. EVen though I've never been a big VM-language fan, machine virtualization rocks. (Aside from Intel's deliberate marginalization of it for anything but high-end.)
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 03:52:39 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 06:32:07AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:34:07 -0700
 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 If I have to install libraries not in the apt repository (or
 multiple conflicting versions of the same library), I tend to put
 it either under an entirely different PREFIX, preferably under a
 dedicated subtree for the app I'm trying to build

I had no idea you could do that! That's fantastic: despite my migration towards Linux, I had been worrying about the day I'd inevitable have to deal with multiple versions of the same thing.

In spite of all my rants against autotools, it *does* let you do cool things like: ./configure --prefix=/path/to/my/dedicated/sandbox which, if things were properly put together, will setup the Makefile such that make install will install to /path/to/my/dedicated/sandbox instead of the usual system directories. Of course, then you need to setup $PATH and maybe a few other environment variables expected by the app to get things to work properly, but this is the way I usually like to install custom built-from-source apps. That way, should I want to uninstall it, I can just nuke the entire root directory dedicated for that app without damaging anything else. :) But wait, there's more... On Debian, a good number of library packages are actually *designed* to support installation of multiple versions simultaneously. Even fragile, sensitive giants like gcc that have an intricate web of library dependencies can have 4.6, 4.7, *and* 4.8 all installed together side-by-side (up to a certain point, of course). A good many libraries have been patched downstream by Debian developers to have proper soname correspondence with ABI changes, and the upstream version number is encoded into the package name (as opposed to just the package version number) so installing multiple versions of the same library is actually *officially* supported.

That's pretty nice. I'm still not *quite* linux-savvy enough to know what I'm doing with chroots (I know about them, but I've never actually set one up, and I'd have to look up how to do it.) Of course, it's not like the need for such things is exclusive to Linux. Take Firefox: Even on Windows it refuses to accept the possibility of having multiple versions installed. So some *other* people hacked it up to make a "portable install" version (which, strangely, *still* requires running an installer?!?), and yet even then, it still flat out refuses to allow multiple versions to run at the same time. Ridiculous.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 22:02:46 +0200
"Paolo Invernizzi" <paolo.invernizzi gmail.com> wrote:
 
 That /was/ possible, and  our company is using the engine /naked/ 
 on linux, but...
 
 https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA12322/what-is-skypekit
 
 Now MS is ending that game, or at least it seems so.
 

Hmm, I had no idea MS had acquired it (or that eBay had owned it before). That would seem to explain why Skype doesn't appear to be able to make up their minds on things :/
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 07:04:25 +0200
Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:
 
 As for virtualization, I have also became a big fan and no longer
 dual boot.
 

Yea, I almost mentioned that actually: The real killer feature of VMs IMO is that they're a very simple, safe and incredibly convenient alternative to dual-booting. Even before I discovered VMs, I swore off dual-booting a long time ago - too much of a pain, too much danger, etc. But virtualization is just a total game-changer. Hell, I don't even feel a need for my separate physical Linux box anymore.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling parent Artur Skawina <art.08.09 gmail.com> writes:
On 09/14/13 07:53, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 (And why the freak do I need to re-./configure for every single program
 that needs compiled? Shouldn't something in autotools already *know* my
 system details and not have to re-detect *everything* every single
 time? "Checking X...", "Checking Y...", "Is Z sane..."...? Why? Every
 other damn autotools-based project *already* checked those every time
 I compiled them! It's like opening my car door twenty thousand times to
 make sure "Yup...it's still a car!". If certain changes might go
 unnoticed then fine, give me a way to force a re-check if really
 needed.)

This is a (system) configuration issue. The support for persistent caches is there, it just needs to be enabled. [1] But then /you/ have to deal with invalidating the cache when something changes (which, in theory, means after /every/ sw install or upgrade). artur [1] for example, using a /etc/config.site file like: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ #!/bin/bash test -z "$SKIP_CONFIG_CACHE" || return 0 if test "$cache_file" = /dev/null -o "$cache_file" = 'config.cache' ; then PFIX=`$CC -v 2>&1 | awk ' /version /{ print$1$3"-"$4 }'` SFIX=`(set | grep '^ac_.*env' | grep -v '=$' | sort ; uname -mo ) | sha1sum | cut -f1 -d' '` cache_file="/var/cache/config.cache/$PFIX-$SFIX" fi ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:07:51 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:51:34 UTC, Peter Alexander 
 wrote:
 Sublime 3 on OSX

No IDE?

No, I'm on OSX and Visual Studio is the only IDE I find bearable. All the others I've tried are clunky and slow with little benefits (XCode, Eclipse, MonoDevelop) I haven't tried Mono-D in a while though, so maybe I'll give it another go.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Zoadian" <github zoadian.de> writes:
i've used mono-d (and might switch back when it is compatiple
with recent xamarin api), but switched to Sublime 3 recently.
could you share your plugins/configs?

i also use scite a lot.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 21:48:15 +0200
"Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:

 Just out of interest.
 
 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

Programmer's Notepad 2 (Windows-only though :( ) On Linux I've just been getting by with Kate and mcedit, mainly because I haven't really looked into other stuff there yet.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Kiith-Sa" <kiithsacmp gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

gvim, with no GUI elements, ultisnips for D snippets, YouCompleteMe for fuzzy completion, and soon DCD for D-aware completion. And various non-D related plugins and custom mappings. Good because I can have e.g. 9 80-column files on the screen at the same time (looking like a grid), and load a session with tens of files almost instantly.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Justin Whear <justin economicmodeling.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 20:02:02 +0000, Justin Whear wrote:

 vim and gvim on linux.

Unix is my IDE.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Brian Schott" <briancschott gmail.com> writes:
Textadept with DCD. Also, "Unix is my IDE."
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:38:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
 BTW, one veery nice thing about ME is I can run it from a 
 remote console window.

Yea, that's a big reason I use vim too. I do a lot of my work through remote connections and having my trusty editor available with good speed and resumeability where I left off (thanks to gnu screen) is a huge nice thing.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:44:52 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:38:00 UTC, Walter Bright 
 wrote:
 BTW, one veery nice thing about ME is I can run it from a 
 remote console window.

Yea, that's a big reason I use vim too. I do a lot of my work through remote connections and having my trusty editor available with good speed and resumeability where I left off (thanks to gnu screen) is a huge nice thing.

Do you actually write significant amounts of code on remote machines? I'm struggling to find a reason to do that.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 22:44:51 +0200
"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:

 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:38:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
 BTW, one veery nice thing about ME is I can run it from a 
 remote console window.

Yea, that's a big reason I use vim too. I do a lot of my work through remote connections and having my trusty editor available with good speed and resumeability where I left off (thanks to gnu screen) is a huge nice thing.

I find vim/emacs confusing, so when I do remote text editing over ssh (or on a machine without a GUI) I like to use mcedit. It does still have some weirdness (copy-paste is a little odd), but it's the closest I've found to a GUI-like editor in text mode. Although if the physical machine I'm on happens to be Linux, I usually prefer to just connect via sshfs and then use whatever GUI-based editor I'd normally use. I love sshfs, I wish Windows had it.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:35:41 UTC, Zoadian wrote:
 i've used mono-d (and might switch back when it is compatiple
 with recent xamarin api), but switched to Sublime 3 recently.
 could you share your plugins/configs?

 i also use scite a lot.

Ops, it seems I confused Mono-D <-> Xamarin. I use Xamarin 4.0.12 with D Plugin from Alexander. I have, besides git, no other Plugins installed. I use Xamarin for developing on Dgame or Demo/Games for it and Sublime/Notpad++ for smaller files.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 09:48:15PM +0200, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.
 
 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will
 try this evening VisualD.

vim. T -- Stop staring at me like that! You'll offend... no, you'll hurt your eyes!
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 08:38:49PM +0000, Justin Whear wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 20:02:02 +0000, Justin Whear wrote:
 
 vim and gvim on linux.

Unix is my IDE.

+1, I like that!! :) I'm gonna hafta start saying that from now on, whenever people ask me about IDEs. T -- Государство делает вид, что платит нам зарплату, а мы делаем вид, что работаем.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 01:40:02PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 On 9/13/13 1:37 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 9/13/2013 1:29 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
MicroEmacs

https://github.com/DigitalMars/med

https://github.com/DigitalMars/me

BTW, one veery nice thing about ME is I can run it from a remote console window. Also, it works exactly the same on every machine/operating system I've owned (ok, I never ported it to the ipod) - DOS, OS/2, Unix, Linux, every Windows flavor, various notebook computers, etc.

No syntax highlighting...

Syntax highlighting hurts my eyes. I've been using vim in black-on-white for more than a decade now. (Well, more accurately, black on an almost fully saturated off-white, but that's irrelevant.) T -- Doubt is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Sep 13 2013
next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 02:14:49AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 06:37:49 +0200
 "dusr" <dusr d.usr> wrote:
 
 Like I said, I've been a Linux user for a long time, and that's by
 choice! But I still envy a lot of what Windows gets right and
 still long for the good old days of DOS where it was just you, the
 hardware, and a little tiny helper library that was there if you
 needed it.

I've used debian from woody to squeeze, then I moved back to windows7. Windows is better.


To each his own, I guess. For me, I couldn't stand 5 minutes of using *any* version of Windows (unless putty was installed on it :-P). The caveat, of course, is that I don't use what the "typical" user uses, like GTK or KDE or whatever it is that comes by default on Debian these days. The first thing I do in the installer is to unselect all X11-related packages and do a minimal GUI-less install, then hand-install a bare bones version of X11, selecting the absolute minimum packages to be just enough to run ratpoison, and go on from there. So my experience is probably rather different from yours. :)
 Heh, I'm sort of the opposite. I've been using Windows from 3.11
 through 7, and from Vista onward I've started to really hate Windows
 more and more (If I wanted to be running a Mac, I'd have gotten a
 Mac, not two versions of "New Windows: Apple-Envy Edition" followed by
 "Microsoft UI-Of-The-Month Club").
 
 Meanwhile, I've been using Linux more and more for testing and servers,
 and I'm looking at switching my main OS over to...probably Debian 7,
 with wine and VirtualBox for the occasional things that don't come in
 Linux flavor. I just wish I could get a Linux file manager I liked.

A Linux file manager? You mean bash? ;-) OK, OK, I kid. Bash does have its annoyances, I admit (my latest bash pet peeve is broken bash_completion scripts that break tab-completion so you can't autocomplete filenames anymore where a filename is actually expected). What about midnight commander? The only file manager I could tolerate back in the old DOS days was Norton Commander, which MC was modelled after. You might like it. Maybe. (But I haven't really used it that much since I came to do things purely in the shell instead, as the shell can handle just about everything MC can, and much more. DOS was a cartoon caricature of what a *real* shell can do, by comparison, so NC was quite the relief from the suffering when using DOS. But on a full-fledged shell, MC kinda loses that necessity. So you may or may not find MC that much better after all. YMMV, caveat emptor, etc., apply.) Or, failing that, you could write a killer file manager app in D, and we could take over the world. :-P T -- For every argument for something, there is always an equal and opposite argument against it. Debates don't give answers, only wounded or inflated egos.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:11:25 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 02:14:49AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 I just wish I could get a Linux file manager I liked.

A Linux file manager? You mean bash? ;-)

Heh, well, that actually *is* my favorite out of all the Linux file managers!
 What about midnight commander? The only file
 manager I could tolerate back in the old DOS days was Norton
 Commander, which MC was modelled after. You might like it. Maybe.

I've tried Total Commander on Windows, which is another program modeled after Norton Commander. It's probably the only file manager in the world that's even less to my taste than OSX's Finder. However, I do keep it around because its multiple-file-renaming tool is freaking awesome. What I'd really like to find is something I can at least configure to basically be "XP's Explorer, but less buggy and inefficient". And that's including something like TortoiseGit. So yea, probably a very tall order. Anything based off Nautilus (which seems to count for most of them) are pretty far off the mark from what I'm looking for. They're *usable* and bear a similar resemblance to what I want, but the details of it are all goofy, and whenever that's all I have available I find myself just doing everything from the commandline instead. (Sometimes I figure that must be the same reason so many linux users swear by the CLI for file management - all linux's GUI ones suck!) The best I've found so far is KDE4's Dolphin, but it's still no Explorer rival, has nothing like Tortoise (to my knowledge), it still has some irritating goofiness (ex: the horizontal scrolling in the tree-view panel is every bit as broken-by-design as in Vista's Explorer), and there's some other things, plus I don't like KDE4 :( (And I'd rather not have to pull in the bloat of KDE4 just for a file manager.) To me, a GUI file manager is like a keyboard and a text-editor: I rely on it so much that I need it to be *just right* or else it becomes a major bottleneck instead of a tool. Heck, I don't even like Win7's Explorer, really. Even after I configured/hacked the hell out of it, it still has some irritating Mac-like tendencies. Still beats Dolphin though :/
 DOS was a cartoon caricature of
 what a *real* shell can do, by comparison

I would tend to agree. ;) Although, at the time, I had came to DOS from Apple 2's "Applesoft BASIC", so I didn't see DOS that way until many years later.
 so NC was quite the relief
 from the suffering when using DOS.

Yea, I can believe that.
 Or, failing that, you could write a killer file manager app in D, and
 we could take over the world. :-P
 

Honestly, unless I find something that fits the bill, that's one of the top projects in my pile of "pet projects I want to do if I ever have time for stuff I can't rationalize as being vaguely work-related."
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 04:59:16AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 23:55:55 -0700
 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 But I dunno, IME, when Windows 3.1 came along, it had so many
 gratuitous limitations that I said to myself, this sucks! So now I
 can't have direct access to hardware in the name of "protection",
 and what do I get in return? Nothing but being straitjacketed into a
 system that can't even do what I want.

OMG, iOS and Android == Win 3.1! Why did I never notice that before!

lol... I do find Android at least 100 times more usable than iOS, though. There's actually a file manager app that lets me *manage my own files*, for crying out loud. And I can mount the thing as a USB drive and, y'know, transfer files without going through the horror of bad GUI design known as iTunes. And I can change the wallpaper without jailbreaking the contraption, install an alternate keyboard, choose from browsers that don't have to fear retribution from Apple for being too similar to Safari, etc.. Not to mention being able to do something so basic as using an arbitrary mp3 as a ringtone (seriously, *why* does the iPhone require a completely separate subsystem and gratuitously obscure file format just for ringtones? it's not as though in this day and age we don't have generic sound-playing libraries that can handle multiple file formats... and don't get me started on the fact that an i*Pod* refuses to receive a custom ringtone, 'cos it's not a phone, in spite of the fact that the built-in clock chooses from the ringtone catalogue for alarm sounds -- the whole thing is straitjacketed beyond belief). Of course, Android isn't *completely* free of annoyances. A recent one is the inability to completely remove preinstalled apps that I don't use and don't intend to use, because they're "system" apps. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the concept of Facebook being a "system" app... Sigh. T -- Life is too short to run proprietary software. -- Bdale Garbee
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Saturday, September 14, 2013 05:43:14 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 The best I've found so far is KDE4's Dolphin, but it's still no
 Explorer rival, has nothing like Tortoise (to my knowledge), it still
 has some irritating goofiness (ex: the horizontal scrolling in the
 tree-view panel is every bit as broken-by-design as in Vista's
 Explorer), and there's some other things, plus I don't like
 KDE4 :(   (And I'd rather not have to pull in the bloat of KDE4 just for
 a file manager.)

I'm a diehard Konqueror fan myself, but I also use KDE as my DE and really like it. I'd probably be a bit lost without Konqueror, because then I'd have to find separate programs for all of the various protocols that Konqueror supports on top of file:// (e.g. ftp and samba). It'll also do svn, cvs, and the like if you want to, though I never use GUIs for source control. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:27:59 -0700
Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:

 On Saturday, September 14, 2013 05:43:14 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 The best I've found so far is KDE4's Dolphin, but it's still no
 Explorer rival, has nothing like Tortoise (to my knowledge), it
 still has some irritating goofiness (ex: the horizontal scrolling
 in the tree-view panel is every bit as broken-by-design as in
 Vista's Explorer), and there's some other things, plus I don't like
 KDE4 :(   (And I'd rather not have to pull in the bloat of KDE4
 just for a file manager.)

I'm a diehard Konqueror fan myself, but I also use KDE as my DE and really like it. I'd probably be a bit lost without Konqueror, because then I'd have to find separate programs for all of the various protocols that Konqueror supports on top of file:// (e.g. ftp and samba). It'll also do svn, cvs, and the like if you want to, though I never use GUIs for source control.

I kinda liked KDE3 (and GNOME 2 wasn't too bad either, for the most part). My non-server Linux installations tend to be either Trinity or XFCE these days. I never thought to try Konqueror as a file manager. My mind always associates it with web browsing.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Saturday, September 14, 2013 15:53:18 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 I never thought to try Konqueror as a file manager. My mind always
 associates it with web browsing.

I actually use it for both, but it's definitely a power user file browser. I've never quite groked why they created Dolphin, because Konqueror is so much better than anything else that I've used (though obviously YMMV) that it just seems weird to me that you'd even consider creating another one, let alone another one that you'd make the default. I think that they were trying to make a file browser that was more newbie-centric, but I don't know. I haven't even opened Dolphin in ages. - Jonathan m Davis
Sep 14 2013
next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 15.09.2013 18:50, schrieb Dicebot:
 On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 03:44:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 As for Gnome 3, I don't know what they're smoking. It's one of the most
 bizarre DEs ever

After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other desktop manager comfortably. It is truly revolutionary, main problem is that people almost never want revolutions and mostly stick to their habits. Ones that suffer badly with Gnome Shell :)

This applies to programming languages as well. :)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 15.09.2013 20:21, schrieb Michael:
 KDE, Gnome, Unity, Xfce.... wtf?

 Win 8.1 rocks)

Workbench
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-16 05:57, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 While I'm happy with click-to-focus[1] due to my many years with
 windows, I still have to say "click before the scroll wheel will
 actually work" is one of the biggest, most ridiculous GUI design
 blunders out there. It's exactly like requiring the user to click a
 control before right-click/middle-click/ctrl-click will work.

 I think I've mentioned this in other threads, but on XP I used
 KatMouse[2] to fix that, and it was a HUGE usability improvement.
 Unfortunately, on Win7 it only works a small fraction of the time. And
 that's unlikely to change because it's closed source abandonware, just
 like all-too-many freeware apps on windows. (Honestly, I never
 understood the windows developer culture of producing closed-source
 freeware.)

The most ridicules thing is having a window with two table views. To be able to scroll in these I have to click on the table view. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-16 08:19, PauloPinto wrote:

 There were a few alternative ones like LiteSTEP and Stardock, just that
 mainstream users hardly feel the need to change the window manager.

I used LiteStep for a while, when I still was running Windows. Quite nice actually. When you have finally configured it they way you like. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 03:41:58 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 04:59:16AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 23:55:55 -0700
 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 But I dunno, IME, when Windows 3.1 came along, it had so many
 gratuitous limitations that I said to myself, this sucks! So now I
 can't have direct access to hardware in the name of "protection",
 and what do I get in return? Nothing but being straitjacketed
 into a system that can't even do what I want.

OMG, iOS and Android == Win 3.1! Why did I never notice that before!

lol... I do find Android at least 100 times more usable than iOS, though. There's actually a file manager app that lets me *manage my own files*, for crying out loud. And I can mount the thing as a USB drive and, y'know, transfer files without going through the horror of bad GUI design known as iTunes. And I can change the wallpaper without jailbreaking the contraption, install an alternate keyboard, choose from browsers that don't have to fear retribution from Apple for being too similar to Safari, etc.. Not to mention being able to do something so basic as using an arbitrary mp3 as a ringtone (seriously, *why* does the iPhone require a completely separate subsystem and gratuitously obscure file format just for ringtones? it's not as though in this day and age we don't have generic sound-playing libraries that can handle multiple file formats... and don't get me started on the fact that an i*Pod* refuses to receive a custom ringtone, 'cos it's not a phone, in spite of the fact that the built-in clock chooses from the ringtone catalogue for alarm sounds -- the whole thing is straitjacketed beyond belief).

Yea, "straitjacketed" is absolutely the word for it. I had to carry an iPhone around for much of 2012, and I can't tell you how many times I had an incredible urge to hurl the stupid thing into the nearest concrete wall. Or lodge it into Steve Jobs's skull, but I guess I was about a year late for that :(
 Of course, Android isn't *completely* free of annoyances. A recent one
 is the inability to completely remove preinstalled apps that I don't
 use and don't intend to use, because they're "system" apps. I'm still
 trying to wrap my head around the concept of Facebook being a
 "system" app... Sigh.
 

Ugh, that's a new one to me. Mine was version 4.0 (and rooted so I could also swap in and out of 2.3 plus the CyanogenMod versions of both 4.0 and 2.3). It was *definitely* the better of the two, but there were still plenty of things I hated about Andorid, too: - Dalvik and Java at the system-level is absurd. - Battery life was a joke. I'm only speculating here, but I can't help wonder if Dalvik was a major reason for that. - Google clearly hates expandable memory as much as Apple does. - It's an iOS clone. - The hardware is an iPhone clone: Capacitive touchscreens and zero physical buttons. Bleh, just give me an updated version of Palm's Zire 71 (with WiFi, PalmOS 6.1+, and for the love of god a *user-replaceable* battery)...please! That thing was brilliantly designed (aside from the stupid non-replaceable battery which has long since rendered my Zire useless). - Google pushes their anti-privacy "cloud" syncing/storage/etc far more heavily than Apple does. Even though they don't outright ban it, they clearly don't want you synching directly to machines *you* own, whereas Apple seems perfectly happy to let you suffer through iTunes in order to bypass their servers. - Just like Apple, they retain the ability to remotely delete *your* apps just in case they feel like it. - Just like Apple, you can't really install multiple versions of stuff or, in most cases, download older versions. Technically maybe you can, but if so it's rather "advanced territory". - I used it as a WiFi-only, but it kept nagging me to activate it every time I rebooted it (which I had to do any time I switched OSes). There was *no* existing option or even hack to disable that. - If there's a newer version of the OS, it will nag you and nag you and nag you to update regardless of whether you actually want to. - The view you get when using it as a USB drive is actually a fairly censored, straightjacketed view. Not nearly as bad as Apple, but still, it takes rooting, some extra work, and maybe also the developer tools to access the *real* filesystem. - Almost *nothing* uses real words. It's all completely meaningless arbitrary symbols, often invented on-the-spot for individual programs. I'm *almost* more interested in Win Phone 8. Except it's butt-ugly, has basically no third-party support (by comparison), and has plenty of its own straitjacketing, too. That said, Android still makes iOS look like a toy (And I truly do see iOS devices as little more than toys.) I do kinda want to get an Android device again, although mainly just because Palm OS 6.1+ devices don't exist. :( I'm quite interested in something I've heard Ubuntu was working on: An installation of full-desktop Ubuntu that runs side-by-side with Android, sharing the same kernel, and switches to desktop mode when you connect it to a monitor. Even before I had heard of them actually *doing* that, I had started to feel something like that had the potential to become the real future of personal computing. Because hell, they're already more than powerful enough. They already connect to HDMI and keyboards/etc. They just need some (more?) virtual memory and an OS/UI that isn't a toy, and that puts them a hair away from being laptop/desktop-killers in probably 99% of use-cases *including* gaming. Granted, I'm not so enthusiastic about Ubuntu anymore, but still, I really think something like that is the right way to go.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 14:16:50 -0700
Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:

 I've never quite groked why they created Dolphin, because
 Konqueror is so much better than anything else that I've used (though
 obviously YMMV) that it just seems weird to me that you'd even
 consider creating another one, let alone another one that you'd make
 the default. I think that they were trying to make a file browser
 that was more newbie-centric, but I don't know.

I would imagine that's probably the reason. After all, Dolphin is easily the most explorer-like file manager I've seen on Linux. Heck, like I said, it even managed to replicate Vista's misguided auto-horizontal-scrolling "feature" in the tree-view panel. And besides, KDE and GNOME have always been about giving a more Windows-like (or mac-like) feel to Linux, and in no small part for the sake of new Linux users. Plus, the latest ones, KDE4 and GNOME3 were largely about re-designing things in hopes of making them easier still. (At least that's been my understanding.)
Sep 14 2013
next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 09:53:34PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 17:04:46 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
It's a miniscule time savings, but it does add up when you're
editing a complex command-line pipeline.

You know what would actually be huge for me? The mouse. If you have a 200 character command line, just clicking it would be so nice. I'm sure there's some ctrl+meta+alt that can do it too, but I don't know my emacs (and readline's vi mode is weak).

There's a vi mode to readline?? My ideal, actually, would be to liberate the command-line from its single-line restriction. It would be in insert mode by default, to cater for the common case, but hitting ESC would put it into navigation mode, where you can use vi movement keys to navigate. You could construct the command in a block (almost like a one-off shell script) before committing and executing it.
 Eventually I'll finish my terminal emulator that will include that
 kind of thing. Probably on a wild combo like ctrl+alt+click so I
 don't accidentally trigger it when I don't want to. But I'm not in a
 huge rush to write that since I actually quite like rxvt and xterm.

I'm a huge fan of rxvt-unicode. No need to switch between (non-unicode) rxvt and xterm, it handles it all.
Eek. I use C-s frequently for throttling program output; it would
suck to have to escape it!

heh, I use gigantic scroll back buffers for that whenever I can.

Well, I do too, but still, sometimes you kinda want a fast key combo to freeze the output from an accidental infinite loop while logged in over a slow ssh connection. It's not so nice to have to disconnect and reconnect just to stop the program (or wait for 5MB of the same text repeated 10 million times to choke through the ssh link). Though I suppose C-c does just as well by killing the program off. In fact, now that I think of it, my use cases for C-s has drastically diminished over the years. Maybe it's not as important as I remember it is anymore. :-)
inability to handle UTF-8 (in this day and age! seriously!).

The X server doesn't make utf-8 easy... I was looking into utf8 input for simpledisplay.d and it is kinda complicated. (Another advantage Windows has - it's been unicode aware for a long time.)

True.
 But, how much do you really need for a window manager?

Just enough to be able to render window titles in UTF-8 correctly. It's not really *that* important otherwise... it's very rare (if ever!) that the WM will actually need to translate keyboard input into UTF-8, for example. For the most part, it could just treat it as an opaque 8-bit byte string.
have the new mobo serving as a headless compute server, then I can
have the best of both worlds!

yes! (BTW, I just hit esc after typing that. I'm on the website, but that's my vi habit - enter something, then immediately hit esc to get back to command mode. When I was a vi newb I spent most my time in insert mode, but now I'm only rarely in there - just long enough to actually insert, then it is back to command immediately.)

When I first started learning vi, I steeled myself to learn it the "right" way by only entering input mode when necessary. The learning curve was a lot steeper that way, but then I also learned faster by not acquiring n00b habits that must later be shed. But yeah, my left little finger has acquired this twitch every now and then to want to hit ESC, even when there's no reason to do so. :-P
Really? I never had a kernel panic from misconfigured X11.

The kernel panics were from earlier in the boot process. For example, NFS over my at the time 10mbps hub was very unreliable, so it went to mount the root filesystem, lost some packets, and kernel panicked. IIRC I ended up fixing that by making nfs use tcp connections rather than the unreliable udp datagrams.

I see. Thanks for the tip, I'll have to keep that in mind in case I run into similar issues. :)
 Of course, X wasn't easy either. It didn't autoconfigure right, the
 driver that was supposed to work for the chip didn't (the screen
 would be garbled), and the other settings are just whoooo. I can
 only imagine how awful it was before then - at least my monitors
 weren't at risk of frying themselves. (or was that a myth too? i
 don't know but i'd believe it)

All I remember was that the X server was so paranoid about not frying your monitor that it often refused to use a resolution / refresh rate that is clearly advertised in both monitor and video card manuals as supported. I often had to feed fake values into the conf file just to make it do what I want (though I may have inadvertently put my monitor at risk of being fried -- never actually happened, though!).
 It did work with the vesa driver though pretty reliably, but that
 couldn't max out the potential of that 1 MB of video ram! But that's
 ok 800x600 looks good anyway.

I ran at 800x600 for many years, before I upgraded to a 1600x1200 LCD monitor. Then 800x600 kinda... didn't fit very well. :-P
annoying, since the kernel (and every else) actually still works,
and I can ssh into it, etc., but it's unusable from the desk and

Maybe svgalib could have helped there too. But yeah, X.org my old motherboard would do something similarly annoying: all input and output at the desktop would freeze dead, all of it, but I could still ssh into the machine so clearly the kernel was still alive.

Actually, it was X malfunctions like that that drove me to compile the SysRq hack in the kernel, so when things went awry, I can hit ctrl-SysRq-k to forcefully kill the X server. If that didn't help, I could at least ctrl-SysRq-s to sync the disk buffers, then ctrl-SysRq-R to force a reboot (the sync is so that I didn't have to wait 15 minutes for fsck to run).
 Even switching vt wouldn't work, X locked up and took the hardware
 with it. Sometimes, kill -9 X via ssh would fix it, but sometimes
 that just left it in another indeterminate state that wouldn't
 recover properly either, forcing the reboot.

Yeah I remember doing some research on that. Apparently X leaves the video card in graphics mode in a way that the kernel didn't know how to undo, so good luck getting the console back. If your intuition of exactly how the VT consoles worked was good enough, though, you could login as root (blind), and restart X11, and sometimes it would come back. Provided it didn't outright crash again immediately, that is. I did try editing X11.conf blind once, in an attempt to fix things, but that was a little too complex for me. :-P
 The weird thing though is sometimes, if I just left it alone for 30
 mins or so, it would actually fix itself. Maybe had to do with power
 management, i don't know.

Really? Never knew about that!
 My new motherboard is a lot saner. Other than the alsa volume
 control problem (pretty minor all things considered) it has worked
 very well.
 
 But I guess we'll see if it continues to when it is 5 years old too.
 My pentium 1 box, now 16 years old, works flawlessly to this day.
 But cliched as it is, they don't make 'em like they used to.

Hmph. My plan is for my current mobo to last for the next 5 years, if not 10. I deliberately invested in an AMD hexacore so that it wouldn't go out of date for a looong time. But we'll see if the hardware can hold up that long. [...]
pretty efficient unlike X11, but it doesn't support unicode fonts.

You sure? I thought it does now, if you enable the kernel framebuffer. (Now I like the vga text mode, so no framebuffer for me, but I'm pretty sure the new stuff is workable there.)

Really? I remember trying it, but the non-ASCII characters came out all wrong. Well, the kernel didn't *have* unicode fonts built-in, and there was no way I know of to make it use .ttf, so I gave up.
Hooray for rewriting old lost projects in D. :) You'd probably get
it back up and running faster anyway, thanks to D's awesome
features.

I can use my own terminal.d instead of ncurses too, yay.

Speaking of which, have you had a chance to look at the latest breakage with DMD git HEAD yet? I'd file a regression on the bugtracker, but I don't know enough about the internals of terminal.d to be able to tell at a glance exactly what went wrong.
What I'd *really* like, is to extend the Linux console to handle
inline graphics (rounded to the next largest multiple of the
character tile size).

Heh, I've been thinking about that too. Part of the reason terminal.d has an enum { linear, cellular } is due to a design I've been pondering (and, of course, it matches right up to the alternate screen feature of linux terminals too). If graphics were available in linear mode, cat file.png would go right ahead and draw it out there. Or something like that, it'd probably need an escape sequence to enable graphic mode to be sane. And then cellular mode would be a framebuffer as well as a text buffer.

I remember talking about this before (IIRC with you). If I could do it, I might just be able to get rid of my GUI browser dependence once and for all. :)
 Believe it or not, the BIOS on DOS used to kinda support all this!
 If you switched to mode 13h and printf()'d, at least using Digital
 Mars C, maybe it is a dm runtime feature rather than the BIOS or DOS
 or whatever, but if you did that, the text would indeed output, and
 you can still write graphics.

I do remember that feature in the BIOS, actually. I also remember it was horrifically slow. In fact, I reinvented my own text output system in assembly which was orders of magnitude faster.
 In mode 3, vga text mode, the graphics stuff would just be swallowed
 and/or replaced by alternate text (omg I have a program that renders
 arbitrary images to ascii art. If you run a .mpg through it, you can
 actually watch movies on a text terminal! tempting to try to write
 that... but i'd prolly just keep it simple), but if you're in a
 graphics capable window and cat image, sure, let's show it.

That would be cool. I'd be able to watch videos over an ssh terminal. :-P Or play 3D games. :-P (And feel nice and geeky about it.)
 I almost think I saw a terminal program that did that. But I want to
 write my own terminal emulator and specification anyway.

The first thing I'd do if I were to write a terminal spec is to get rid of the stupid dependence on ESC as the terminal control escape code. There are just too many legit user usages of ESC (such as vim!) for that choice to be anything but a horrible one. If anything, I'd use an invalid UTF-8 value like 0xFD so that it will never get mixed up with literal output data. In fact, I'd use all the 1-byte invalid UTF code points as terminal control sequences, for brevity. [...]
 But what's important about the task bar is you can see it without
 asking for a popup. So then, say, I get an IM and it adds a * to the
 left side of the name, and now I can see it without making an
 effort.

I dunno, I prefer to explicitly check for messages when I want to, rather than being constantly interrupted by dings and beeps and popups, including on-screen text that changes. If anything, I'd have the * added to the window name and I'd look for it when I actually feel like looking at the window list. I'm a pretty big fan of pull media rather than push media.
 The other nice thing is the programs stay in a certain space. Most
 the titles on my thing are just 'rxvt' - pretty useless. But I know
 the one on the left is one thing, the one in the middle is another,
 etc.

I never leave the title as 'rxvt'; I wrote a little program that writes the escape sequence to change the window title to the command-line args, and the first thing that I usually do upon firing up a new terminal is to set its title to something meaningful. [...]
 blargh i need to stop dreaming of and talking about my ideal linux
 and get to work! lol

Yeah I should stop talking about ratpoison replacements, and actually go write one. In D. With ranges. :-P T -- Marketing: the art of convincing people to pay for what they didn't need before which you can't deliver after.
Sep 16 2013
next sibling parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-17 01:35, Justin Whear wrote:

 Do you know about C-x C-e?  If EDITOR is set to "vi" it should open the
 current command in vi as a temp file, allow you to edit, and when you
 write and quit it'll execute it.  Not sure if this is Bash only or
 universal.

OMG, it works with TextMate on Mac OS X. That is so cool :) -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 18.09.2013 22:31, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
 On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 03:01:26AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 at 17:01:55 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Actually, that gives me an idea. What if, instead of defaulting to
 character data, the terminal input stream defaults to control
 structures?

hehe those who don't understand Windows are doomed to reinvent it :) :) :)

lol... though it makes me think of the latest C++ proposals as "those who don't understand D are doomed to reinvent it, poorly". :-P

Even though I bought the updated version of "The C++ Programming Language", I've started to get the feeling that the C++ standard might get into the same direction as ANSI Extended Pascal. It gets updated, but besides a few places in the world, developers will eventually stop caring. I agree with Andrei's statement at Going Native. Even if C++14 and eventually C++17 make developer's life easier, you still need to know all archaic issues all the way back to C, to be able to tackle any issues that come up.
 I remember in the old DOS days, some games would load up custom graphics
 into the video card's text font buffer, so that they can draw sprites
 just by writing the corresponding characters into the video card's text
 buffer.  You can get very fast drawing rates since the video card does
 most of the work for you (and you only need to transfer 1 byte per 8x8
 block of pixels instead of 8 bytes or more).

In the Amiga was even better, thanks to the custom blitter chips. Just set up the required information and start a few DMA operations. Nowadays, you can get a similar effect with a few shaders. -- Paulo
Sep 18 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
[...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konqueror still
 runs circles around it. For example, if you want a horizontal split
 or more than one split.  Also, I don't think Dolphin has the file
 size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden monsters in your
 ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less :-) T -- I think Debian's doing something wrong, `apt-get install pesticide', doesn't seem to remove the bugs on my system! -- Mike Dresser
Sep 19 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Wyatt" <wyatt.epp gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 19 September 2013 at 14:27:14 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 [...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konqueror 
 still
 runs circles around it. For example, if you want a horizontal 
 split
 or more than one split.  Also, I don't think Dolphin has the 
 file
 size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden monsters in 
 your
 ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

your home. In kilobytes. It's much less so for visualising where hotspot directories are, let alone seeing the large divisions within them or getting a sense of their relative magnitude. It's accurate, but data that doesn't end with presentation useful for humans is next to worthless. shopt -s dotglob; du -sm ~/* | sort -rn | less ...is a bit closer, but there's a lot of room for improvement. Even the KDE part isn't really optimal (for example, I think reducing the recursion one level would be a better default), but it plays to the strengths of the human visual system markedly better: http://chrisjrob.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/konqueror-file-size-view.png -Wyatt
Sep 19 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 17:01:18 +0200
"Wyatt" <wyatt.epp gmail.com> wrote:
 
 ...is a bit closer, but there's a lot of room for improvement.  
 Even the KDE part isn't really optimal (for example, I think 
 reducing the recursion one level would be a better default), but 
 it plays to the strengths of the human visual system markedly 
 better:
 http://chrisjrob.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/konqueror-file-size-view.png
 

Oh wow, I've used similar tools on windows before, like WinDirStat. And I love them, but that thing having the directory names *shown* without needing to hover is a really nice improvement. What's the apt package name for that? Or is it already in dolphin and just needs enabled?
Sep 19 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--089e013cbdc497334e04e6c731b7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 [...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konqueror still
 runs circles around it. For example, if you want a horizontal split
 or more than one split.  Also, I don't think Dolphin has the file
 size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden monsters in your
 ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

This is exactly why linux is shit. :-)

--089e013cbdc497334e04e6c731b7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh <span dir=3D"ltr">&= lt;<a href=3D"mailto:hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx" target=3D"_blank">hsteoh quick= fur.ath.cx</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class= =3D"gmail_quote"> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p= x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wy= att wrote:<br> [...]<br> <div class=3D"im">&gt; Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where= Konqueror still<br> &gt; runs circles around it. For example, if you want a horizontal split<br=

file<br> &gt; size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden monsters in your<br=

<br> </div>du ~ | sort -r -n | less<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This is = exactly why linux is shit.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote c= lass=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;= padding-left:1ex"> :-)<br></blockquote></div></div></div> --089e013cbdc497334e04e6c731b7--
Sep 19 2013
next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 20.09.2013 16:05, schrieb JN:
 On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 12:16:39 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Uh... you do realize that this is because Linux actually *lets* you fix
 things? If something like this happened on Windows, the only real
 solution is to nuke the system from orbit and start from ground zero
 again (i.e. reinstall). One can hardly expect that repairing a broken
 car engine should require no thought.

When was the last time you used Windows? Since Vista, if a graphics driver crashes, I usually get a black screen for few seconds, then a nice window saying "The GPU driver has crashed, windows has restarted it". If it really breaks, it's a matter of going into Safe Mode and installing the driver again. But overall, Windows is almost uncrashable as long as you don't have a defective device. On Linux? hah, bad driver will lock you out of the system, installations regularly break. Closing the system? Oh let me just flash random gibberish that looks like memory corruption, then some log messages where it's "FATAL ERROR" every third line. No thanks, I prefer my stable system.

I have a better one that happened to me this year. For religious reasons the distribution developers (Ubuntu) push an half done open source version of a wireless driver, that replaces the existing binary blob from the manufacturer. Afterwards you loose the ability to connect to routers that only talk IPv4. -- Paulo
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 21.09.2013 12:12, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
 On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 05:05:41 -0400
 Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:
 You do realize that in the time you've spent taking a friendly OS
 discussion and single-handedly trying[1] to turn it into yet another
 ill-informed OS flamewar (congratulations, btw) you could have already
 learned quite a bit about using a unix command line?

 [1] Don't deny it. Your intent to bait was obvious a few posts back,
 but due to your good standing here I've been giving you a chance.

That came out overly-harsh and not how I intended. ("Yea, no shit, Nick") Uhh, yea... What I mean is just, in this section of the thread, it has been sounding as if you're simply flame-baiting or arguing for the sake of arguing. (And then I somehow managed to awkwardly weave that into a completely different and not-terribly-important point about "time it takes", bleh, whatever...)

Just yesterday I've watched a cool talk from Rich Hickey (clojure designer) about design and the time it takes to learn stuff. http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Design-Composition-Performance Basically, one of his messages is that nothing comes for free and learning requires effort. He makes the remark that only in the software industry people seem to have the "learn in xxx days" mentality and suff for dummies. -- Paulo
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 21/09/13 11:05, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 So? Does everything have to be targeted at new/casual users? Can't
 experienced users have stuff that's made for them? Who ever said
 command lines are still intended for everybody? Keep in mind, a
 programmer is NOT a casual or new user. But in any case, please don't
 mistake "Windows vs Linux" as a "one size fits all" topic, because you
 seem to be steering things that way.

There's a difference between difficulty that is inherent, versus difficulty that is unnecessary and arises out of a lack of concern for usability. Or, in the case being discussed here, more likely it arises out of historical priorities that apply much less today. I would imagine that back in the early days of UNIX, processing key-presses was much more expensive than it is today, and there was thus a strong functional benefit in minimizing the amount of typing. (That still applies to an extent today if you're typing commands over a slow ssh connection, for example.) If we were designing command-line scripting from scratch, today, we'd do something very different and it would definitely be much more user-friendly, and no one would lose from that -- both experts and novices would benefit.
 Rant: Seems to be a big trend in computing these days. Everything is all
 about catering to Average Joe Numbskull and Little Miss Facebook, and to
 hell anyone who has more advanced experience and needs where "usable
 by anyone's grandmother" is the least of their concerns.

 Average Joes need their tools, sure, but so do the rest of us.

Speaking as a hopefully non-average Joe ... making things usable by anyone's grandmother doesn't necessarily have to come at the cost of making things less good for experts. Well-done usability design makes life easier for experts as well as for novices. The problem is that because experts are as good as they are, they are much more capable of dealing with unnecessary complexity. And, having mastered unnecessary complexity, it's then that bit more difficult to invest the time to learn a new, simpler way of doing things, because it means investing time to re-learn how to do stuff _you can already do_, and that learning curve means you'll go through a period of being less capable (because you're learning) than you are with your existing toolkit. And then of course there's all the legacy stuff that does things using the old tools and which you know you'll have to keep using, so it's another reason to stick with what you know ... and thus lockin happens. Case in point: C++ vs. D. Is anyone here going to claim that, _as a language_, D is not significantly more user-friendly than C++? Yet it's no less powerful -- in fact, the enhanced user-friendliness frees up experts to do more things better.
 You do realize that in the time you've spent taking a friendly OS
 discussion and single-handedly trying[1] to turn it into yet another
 ill-informed OS flamewar (congratulations, btw) you could have already
 learned quite a bit about using a unix command line?

 [1] Don't deny it. Your intent to bait was obvious a few posts back, but
 due to your good standing here I've been giving you a chance.

For what it's worth, I think you may have missed the humour of Manu's posts. Over-the-top criticism, in the right tone of voice, can be a pretty good way to get people who are used to a particular way of doing things to re-evaluate their assumptions. It's important to occasionally engage in mockery and caricature of the things that we value, because it helps to re-engage our critical faculties about what is good and bad. Specifically in this case: the user-friendliness of GNU/Linux distros has come a _huge_ way in the last 10 years, but there's no reason why they shouldn't be every bit as surface-friendly (maybe even more so) than the popular commercial OS's while retaining all the power that experts need and want. It's a terrible shame that more attention is not given to this surface-friendliness, and it's striking how resistant many old-school free software people are to usability-oriented improvements _that don't necessarily constrain them_. ** Example 1 ** I was a longstanding KDE user until with the 12.04 release of Ubuntu, I switched over to using Unity. I found it much more usable and effective in all sorts of ways, but initially I was frustrated because there were superficially less config options available. It was striking how quickly I realized _I didn't miss them_ and that most of that configurability I'd had with KDE was a distraction rather than something that assisted me. As someone wrote round-about that time, there's a tendency for customisability to be an excuse for lack of design. ** Example 2 ** The first GNU/Linux distro I ever installed on my own machine was Ubuntu 5.10, which I decided I should try out after seeing video of Mark Shuttleworth's talk at DebConf 2005. Coming from Windows there was a fairly steep learning curve, but what buggered it for me was that my wireless card driver wasn't supported and getting it working involved a complicated procedure editing various config files to get the system to use a proprietary Windows driver. I just couldn't get it to work. Then, I tried OpenSUSE 10.0, which had YaST -- a GUI config tool which could handle all the complicated under-the-bonnet stuff I needed, it just needed to be pointed to the proprietary driver and it would sort out the rest itself. So, SUSE was what kept me using Linux, and after a period of finding all the ways to shoot myself in the foot (e.g. installing RPMs from 3rd-party repos and seeing how they'd break all my system dependencies...), and getting used to Linux-y ways of doing stuff rather than Windows-y, I got to the point where I switched back over to Ubuntu, was comfortable doing the command-line config for the wireless driver, and have never really looked back. The point is, without a distro that catered to novices who had no clue how to use the command line, I'd have been sunk. And as it is, I've been able to get to the point of becoming much more capable, thanks to there being a tool available that let me initially bypass the depth of complexity of the system. ** Example 3 ** ... when colleagues first tried to get me to install Linux on my system, way back in 2001. Much laughter in the office when I suggested that I thought Windows was a more effective, better-made OS. By coincidence, the same day, we had a visitor coming to give a presentation which she had on a 1.44 MB floppy disk (I know, I know, this sounds like an archaelogical dig...). Cue much amusement on my part as all the guys in the office tried to remember the command-line instructions to mount a floppy on Red Hat. Today, of course, it's a given that if you insert a disk, your Linux distro should auto-detect and work out how to mount it, but back then, this kind of usability issue wasn't really considered important -- even though auto-detection is just as beneficial to the expert as the novice.
 I had a video card driver problem the other day. The bundled
 auto-update app failed, and totally broke my computer.
 I had to download kernel source, and run some scripts to compile
 some

 of shim that made the video driver compatible with my kernel to
 get it working again... absolutely astounding.

Uh... you do realize that this is because Linux actually *lets* you fix things? If something like this happened on Windows, the only real solution is to nuke the system from orbit and start from ground zero again (i.e. reinstall). One can hardly expect that repairing a broken car engine should require no thought.

Nothing like that has EVER happened to me in a few decades of windows. In my experience asa linux user, these sort of problems are a daily chore.

I've had stuff like that happen on Windows. Not on my own system within the last few years, but over "a few decades"? Oh hell yea. OTOH, I don't think I've had such trouble with Linux in at least as long. I think 2002 was probably the last time.

It's worth remembering that the ability to go under the bonnet and fix things, while in principle it's available to everyone, is not an advantage that's perceptible to many users. To a great many users, _any_ breakage that can't be fixed through the regular OS GUI is a "take it to the experts or else just reinstall it" show-stopper. So, if the _typical_ problems of your OS require under-the-bonnet maintenance, then this is a usability problem that it's worth trying to address.
 Speaking of which, I managed to totally break my computer last night /
 this morning too.

No shit. Should I be surprised? ;)

 but the hardy little thing just kept going. It was
 causing subtle breakages like my printer mysteriously failing to
 work, and when I finally figured out the problem, I downloaded a
 new kernel and recompiled it.

... speechless ;)

 I rest my case.

Ok, now I know you're just trying to troll. But I've never seen you troll before so you should know better. He made it perfectly clear he had been messing around with his own internals. *Plus* you know perfectly well messing around with Windows internals can also lead to problems requiring expert-skill recovery techniques, so really, you *know* that you know better, so cut the shit. Yes, Linux sucks. And guess what? So does Windows. I use both, by choice. End of story.

I think it's generally true that (these days) most of the under-the-bonnet maintenance I have to do on GNU/Linux is down to the fact that I ask more of the system than I do of Windows, and I do more risky stuff that requires me to take on more responsibility. (In fact, I hardly use Windows at all these days, and I ask my Ubuntu setup to do all sorts of things I'd never have dreamed of doing back when Windows was my main OS.) On the other hand, I think it's daft not to recognize the fact that Windows is in many ways better at helping the user avoid having to go beneath the surface to fix problems, and that surface-level friendliness makes a big difference in how easy it is to use in practice. It solves _more users' problems more of the time_. This ought to be somewhere GNU/Linux can clean up, because it ought to be possible to have that surface friendliness while also being _easier_ to go under the hood. (Though as I discovered as a novice Linux user, that ease of going under the hood can be also a great way to screw things up for yourself. It's a bit like giving someone a handful of basic martial arts moves can be a great way to get them beaten up...)
 I think the main difference is quality-assurance. Windows software is
 more likely to be released only after it's reasonably proven that it
 works.

Like Debian.

Debian's QA is different to that of Windows. Debian test to ensure that the software is bug-free -- they don't as a rule consider usability challenges to be bugs, and they will sometimes favour inferior technical solutions for non-technical reasons (e.g. driver licensing). I actually think that they're right to have that strong free software focus, and that in the long term it also results in better software, but on a short-term basis it does result in more user-facing problems. Whereas, whatever extensive criticisms one can make of Microsoft Windows, one thing that has to be acknowledged is that they have a very strong focus on minimizing user-facing problems or making it trivial to deal with them. Bottom line: we all know that GNU/Linux is fundamentally a better OS than Windows. We all know that many of the claims about user-friendliness are FUD, and that many of the real problems arise out of Windows lock-in in the computing space (driver support being the most obvious). But there are certain usability issues that are particularly damaging for non-technical users, which do arise much more regularly on GNU/Linux than on Windows systems, and we shouldn't deny this or claim that it's tolerable. It's a fair criticism that there are not enough actors in the GNU/Linux world focusing on design for usability, and this ought to change. Best wishes, -- Joe
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 21/09/13 12:12, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 That came out overly-harsh and not how I intended. ("Yea, no shit,
 Nick") Uhh, yea...

Hah, and I just managed to write a huge long "Profundus Maximus" post in response to try and negotiate the peace ... :-P http://www.flamewarriorsguide.com/warriorshtm/profundusmaximus.htm
 What I mean is just, in this section of the thread, it has been
 sounding as if you're simply flame-baiting or arguing for the sake of
 arguing.

 (And then I somehow managed to awkwardly weave that into a completely
 different and not-terribly-important point about "time it takes", bleh,
 whatever...)

Honestly, I think a bit of good-humoured trolling among friends is sometimes a good thing. Keeps everyone on their toes and thinking ... :-)
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 21/09/13 12:44, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 Basically, one of his messages is that nothing comes for free and learning
 requires effort.

 He makes the remark that only in the software industry people seem to have the
 "learn in xxx days" mentality and suff for dummies.

One reason I like D is because it gives you access to all the difficult concepts, but doesn't wrap them up in difficult or finnicky syntax. Sometimes highly expert developers are not good at appreciating the difference.
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling parent reply Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com> writes:
On 21/09/2013 16:07, Manu wrote:
 I'm also not 'average-joe-numskull', at least I don't like to think I
 am, but that doesn't mean I want to know how a car is built, and then in
 turn how each individual part was built, and how to fix it, before I can
 have confidence it will get me to Sydney in one piece.
 I don't actually really care about how linux works, or any of the little
 bits and pieces that form it's awkward foundation... and I shouldn't
 need to in order to like the premise of an open system, and want to use
 it on that merit alone.
 I don't actually enjoy OPERATING a computer, I enjoy the creative
 process of working, and getting work done. Solving interesting problems.
 If the computer gets in my way, it has failed me at some level.
 That might sound strange coming from a software engineer, but I guess
 that's how I see it. I just don't have the patience to mess with my OS
 anymore.

My feelings exactly. I learned about Linux and studied it when I was in high-school (Windows 98/Me era), and I was quite excited about it. Windows was more shite those days, and I knew Linux was not for the average user, but I thought that once I learned it well enough (shell, network, configuring partitions, automounting, the X server, etc.), it would be worthwhile to use. That wasn't the case unfortunately. There was always new stuff that would come up that you would need to learn how to configure, or need to thinker, or there would be shortcomings in application functionality. After a certain point it was just annoying. It might be "fun" for people who get kicks out of working the innards of a system and being closer to how things work, but on my computer I wanted to either have my leisure time, or get real work done. And spending time configuring stuff (that in Windows just worked out of the box) is not a productive use of one's time in any way, shape or form. True, this was like 10 years ago and Linux distros got better, but so has Windows, and nowdays there is little motivation now for me to try a different OS/desktop-environment. -- Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer
Sep 23 2013
next sibling parent Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+dng gmail.com> writes:
On 23/09/2013 15:50, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 I'm surprised at people talking about the amount of time spent
 configuring stuff on Linux, etc., because it's never happened to me! I
 mean, OK, in the early days you had to manually configure X11 and deal
 with all of the obscure problems, but that's no longer the case today.
 All I have to do is 'apt-get install <package>' and it Just Works(tm).

Yeah, that was several years ago. Nowadays the hardware support and configuration seems to work straight out from the box as well. The remaining reasons that keep me away from Linux are other now. -- Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer
Sep 23 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> writes:
On 09/23/2013 02:01 PM, Dicebot wrote:
 ...

 Ironically, this is exactly the reason I have never succeeded in using
 the Windows for daily work. Amount of manual configuration and
 subverting the defaults needed to make it actually usable for my
 programming flow is outstanding. ...

I have never figured out how to even get it into that state, but it might have been lack of motivation. I had to work under Windows a while last year. It does not work for me, no matter how loudly one might assert it does. Eg. the (default?) file system is a joke. It will lock files, not even tell you in which unimportant program it is still considered open, and prevent you from getting work done. The OS has to mandate an awkward UI that eg. randomly hides windows behind other windows in a way that induces hair-pulling or wastes screen space and power for useless colour effects on overly thick margins and "title bars". (Not to speak of the task bar, which eats up significant screen space just in order to offer a really lousy interface to everything.) One needs to be a master in handling of the pointing device in order not to accidentally miss some button at the other end of the screen (that should have been a named command in the first place) and wreak random havoc that swaps around some windows or re-configures the current GUI application into a state that one likes (even) less than the one before. Resetting this requires careful research, with multiple roundtrips to a search engine in order to look at awkward procedural descriptions of how to access the "Blah-Configuration-Whatever-Dialog" referred to in the last step, in the most unexpected places. (The descriptions are always text only and imprecise.) And those are just a few examples. A lot of trivial and less trivial things I attempted to do under Windows ended up feeling exactly that way. There's so much time wasted for random micro-management not at all related to the task at hand. I'd rather deal with compatibility issues. (I rarely had to though.) I am well aware of, and respect the fact that some need to use Windows because it happens to be compatible with some Software they need or want to rely on, but I cannot relate to any statements attributing any kind of positive quality to the experience offered by the OS itself. (This is from a guy who installed his first non-Windows system three years ago.)
Sep 23 2013
prev sibling parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/23/13 5:30 PM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
 On Monday, 23 September 2013 at 21:21:23 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
 wrote:

 clip

 Yea, I find installing software is often (not always, but often)
 *easier* on Linux these days, thanks to apt and such. It used to be a
 nightmare of dependency issues in the days of dpkg/rpm[1]. But now,
 most of the time it's just one trivial command. Done. Or if you prefer
 GUIs, the...uhh...what's it called, Synaptec?, is just as easy, *and*
 good for discoverability: It's basically a freeware app store, but
 Linux had it even *before* iOS.

Just a short story to reinforce the above point. In our Grad Lab at school the girl I sat beside was also the system admin. One day I was working and I needed a piece of software that wasn't installed on my computer. So I asked her if she could install it when she had the chance. She said "sure" and asked me for the PC name I was working on so I to told her, and then I said, "No great rush, but can you let me know when you have it installed". Without a pause she just said, "It's already installed". I typed the command and the program started. Total time 6 or 7 seconds. I was very impressed (the lab computers ran Ubuntu).

Marriage material! :o) Andrei
Sep 23 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:11:51 +1000
Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote:

 On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 
 On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 [...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konqueror
 still runs circles around it. For example, if you want a
 horizontal split or more than one split.  Also, I don't think
 Dolphin has the file size view plugin, which is nice for finding
 hidden monsters in your ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

This is exactly why linux is shit. :-)

It's exactly why those not fluent in Linux believe Linux is shit ;) If all someone knows is HyperCard or AppleScript, D is going to look like shit. "It sucks because I don't understand it, because it's not at all like English!" When really, being so much different is part of what *allows* it to be so much better, to surpass the limitations of the more familiar models. That said, there is a factor of learning curve and it is initially very intimidating.
Sep 19 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--089e01633baa88430304e6cb2bd5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 20 September 2013 14:23, Nick Sabalausky <
SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:

 On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:11:51 +1000
 Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote:

 On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 [...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konqueror
 still runs circles around it. For example, if you want a
 horizontal split or more than one split.  Also, I don't think
 Dolphin has the file size view plugin, which is nice for finding
 hidden monsters in your ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

This is exactly why linux is shit. :-)

It's exactly why those not fluent in Linux believe Linux is shit ;) If all someone knows is HyperCard or AppleScript, D is going to look like shit. "It sucks because I don't understand it, because it's not at all like English!" When really, being so much different is part of what *allows* it to be so much better, to surpass the limitations of the more familiar models. That said, there is a factor of learning curve and it is initially very intimidating.

When I was living in Finland, I NEVER heard a Finn go around saying "English is shit, Finnish is way better! You just don't understand it, you obviously need to take the time to learn it and then you'll see the light!". Funnily enough, they all learn English. This is so they can talk with... everybody else ;) It might be fine for the few that know it, but the rest don't want to know it, don't want to invest the time to learn it, and have no reason to do so. This isn't a very good argument for why Linux is awesome, it's really just evidence that Linux is completely inaccessible. I don't consider that a positive attribute of basically anything. I don't think there's any good reason for that line to make so little sense. If the argument is that typing more characters is too hard and time consuming, I'd then raise the question as to whether typing characters into a shell is the best interface in the first place...? Surely the amount of time invested into learning linux at that level, if rather invested in working on a productive AND user-friendly solution to your actual problem that the majority of people could also use... would that be a better use of time? (not only for yourself, but for everyone?) I like the idea of Linux, I'd like it to succeed, but I think the key problem with Linux is precisely this sort of thinking. The users/developers of Linux hold it back. I think they erroneously think it's awesome, and INTENTIONALLY write software with interfaces like this, thereby deliberately isolating themselves from everyone else, and then wonder why everyone else isn't interested... Ubuntu has done a lot to help in recent years, but whenever I use it, I still can't get past the feeling that it's all just a facade. If any single microscopic little thing goes wrong, then you're back at square-1. I had a video card driver problem the other day. The bundled auto-update app failed, and totally broke my computer. I had to download kernel source, and run some scripts to compile some sort of shim that made the video driver compatible with my kernel to get it working again... absolutely astounding. --089e01633baa88430304e6cb2bd5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">On 20 September 2013 14:23, Nick Sabalausky <span dir=3D"l= tr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com" target=3D"_b= lank">SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div cla= ss=3D"gmail_extra"> <div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi= n:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"HOE= nZb"><div class=3D"h5">On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:11:51 +1000<br> Manu &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:turkeyman gmail.com">turkeyman gmail.com</a>&gt;= wrote:<br> <br> &gt; On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:hsteoh qu= ickfur.ath.cx">hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; [...]<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konquer= or<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; still runs circles around it. For example, if you want a<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; horizontal split or more than one split. =C2=A0Also, I don&#= 39;t think<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; Dolphin has the file size view plugin, which is nice for fin= ding<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; hidden monsters in your ~.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; du ~ | sort -r -n | less<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; This is exactly why linux is shit.<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; :-)<br> <br> </div></div>It&#39;s exactly why those not fluent in Linux believe Linux is= shit ;)<br> <br> If all someone knows is HyperCard or AppleScript, D is going to look<br> like shit. &quot;It sucks because I don&#39;t understand it, because it&#39= ;s not<br> at all like English!&quot; When really, being so much different is part of<= br> what *allows* it to be so much better, to surpass the limitations of<br> the more familiar models.<br> <br> That said, there is a factor of learning curve and it is initially very<br> intimidating.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>When I was living in Finland,= I NEVER heard a Finn go around saying &quot;English is shit, Finnish is wa= y better! You just don&#39;t understand it, you obviously need to take the = time to learn it and then you&#39;ll see the light!&quot;. Funnily enough, = they all learn English. This is so they can talk with... everybody else ;)<= /div> <div><br></div><div>It might be fine for the few that know it, but the rest= don&#39;t want to know it, don&#39;t want to invest the time to learn it, = and have no reason to do so.</div><div>This isn&#39;t a very good argument = for why Linux is awesome, it&#39;s really just evidence that Linux is compl= etely inaccessible. I don&#39;t consider that a positive attribute of basic= ally anything.</div> <div>I don&#39;t think there&#39;s any good reason for that line to make so= little sense. If the argument is that typing more characters is too hard a= nd time consuming, I&#39;d then raise the question as to whether typing cha= racters into a shell is the best interface in the first place...?</div> <div><br></div><div>Surely the amount of time invested into learning linux = at that level, if rather invested in working on a productive AND user-frien= dly solution to your actual problem that the majority of people could also = use... would that be a better use of time? (not only for yourself, but for = everyone?)</div> <div><br></div><div>I like the idea of Linux, I&#39;d like it to succeed, b= ut I think the key problem with Linux is precisely this sort of thinking.</= div><div>The users/developers of Linux hold it back. I think they erroneous= ly think it&#39;s awesome, and INTENTIONALLY write software with interfaces= like this, thereby deliberately isolating themselves from everyone else, a= nd then wonder why everyone else isn&#39;t interested...</div> <div><br></div><div>Ubuntu has done a lot to help in recent years, but when= ever I use it, I still can&#39;t get past the feeling that it&#39;s all jus= t a facade. If any single microscopic little thing goes wrong, then you&#39= ;re back at square-1.</div> <div><br></div><div>I had a video card driver problem the other day. The bu= ndled auto-update app failed, and totally broke my computer.</div><div>I ha= d to download kernel source, and run some scripts to compile some sort of s= him that made the video driver compatible with my kernel to get it working = again... absolutely astounding.</div> </div></div></div> --089e01633baa88430304e6cb2bd5--
Sep 19 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 2013-09-20 at 12:11 +1000, Manu wrote:
 On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
=20
 On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 [...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konqueror still
 runs circles around it. For example, if you want a horizontal split
 or more than one split.  Also, I don't think Dolphin has the file
 size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden monsters in your
 ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

This is exactly why linux is shit.

s/linux/posix compliant operating system/
=20
 :-)

But remember everything you eat has almost certainly been grown using that exact substance. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--001a11c33b0250ea0604e6cf12b2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 20 September 2013 20:52, Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> wrote:

 On Fri, 2013-09-20 at 12:11 +1000, Manu wrote:
 On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 [...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konqueror still
 runs circles around it. For example, if you want a horizontal split
 or more than one split.  Also, I don't think Dolphin has the file
 size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden monsters in your
 ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

This is exactly why linux is shit.

s/linux/posix compliant operating system/
 :-)

But remember everything you eat has almost certainly been grown using that exact substance.

I think you've gotta be pretty lucky these days if everything you eat is actually grown in that substance... Commercial agriculture isn't what it used to be... --001a11c33b0250ea0604e6cf12b2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">On 20 September 2013 20:52, Russel Winder <span dir=3D"ltr= ">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:russel winder.org.uk" target=3D"_blank">russel wind= er.org.uk</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D= "gmail_quote"> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p= x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5">On F= ri, 2013-09-20 at 12:11 +1000, Manu wrote:<br> &gt; On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:hsteoh qu= ickfur.ath.cx">hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; [...]<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konquer= or still<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; runs circles around it. For example, if you want a horizonta= l split<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; or more than one split. =C2=A0Also, I don&#39;t think Dolphi= n has the file<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden monsters = in your<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; ~.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; du ~ | sort -r -n | less<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; This is exactly why linux is shit.<br> <br> </div></div>s/linux/posix compliant operating system/<br> <br> &gt;<br> &gt; :-)<br> <br> But remember everything you eat has almost certainly been grown using<br> that exact substance.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think you&#39;v= e gotta be pretty lucky these days if everything you eat is actually grown = in that substance...</div><div>Commercial agriculture isn&#39;t what it use= d to be...</div> </div></div></div> --001a11c33b0250ea0604e6cf12b2--
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "PauloPinto" <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 11:35:54 UTC, Manu wrote:
 On 20 September 2013 20:52, Russel Winder 
 <russel winder.org.uk> wrote:

 On Fri, 2013-09-20 at 12:11 +1000, Manu wrote:
 On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh 
 <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 [...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where 
 Konqueror still
 runs circles around it. For example, if you want a 
 horizontal split
 or more than one split.  Also, I don't think Dolphin has 
 the file
 size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden 
 monsters in your
 ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

This is exactly why linux is shit.

s/linux/posix compliant operating system/
 :-)

But remember everything you eat has almost certainly been grown using that exact substance.

I think you've gotta be pretty lucky these days if everything you eat is actually grown in that substance... Commercial agriculture isn't what it used to be...

Here in Germany, there are always lot of discussions about the current state of affairs.
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--089e01633baafd3a8504e6da5f1d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 20 September 2013 23:47, PauloPinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:

 On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 11:35:54 UTC, Manu wrote:

 On 20 September 2013 20:52, Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> wrote:

  On Fri, 2013-09-20 at 12:11 +1000, Manu wrote:
 On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh > <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx>

 On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 [...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where > > >



 runs circles around it. For example, if you want a > > >



 or more than one split.  Also, I don't think Dolphin has > > > the



 size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden > > > monsters



 ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

This is exactly why linux is shit.

s/linux/posix compliant operating system/
 :-)

But remember everything you eat has almost certainly been grown using that exact substance.

actually grown in that substance... Commercial agriculture isn't what it used to be...

Here in Germany, there are always lot of discussions about the current state of affairs.

I wish the rest of us could say the same. We're a pathetic patsy nation that just does whatever the yanks tell us to. --089e01633baafd3a8504e6da5f1d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">On 20 September 2013 23:47, PauloPinto <span dir=3D"ltr">&= lt;<a href=3D"mailto:pjmlp progtools.org" target=3D"_blank">pjmlp progtools= .org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmai= l_quote"> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p= x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im">On Friday, 20 September 20= 13 at 11:35:54 UTC, Manu wrote:<br> </div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-l= eft:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im"> On 20 September 2013 20:52, Russel Winder &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:russel wind= er.org.uk" target=3D"_blank">russel winder.org.uk</a>&gt; wrote:<br> <br> </div><div class=3D"im"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0= 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On Fri, 2013-09-20 at 12:11 +1000, Manu wrote:<br> &gt; On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh &gt; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:hste= oh quickfur.ath.cx" target=3D"_blank">hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx</a>&gt; wrote:= <br> &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; [...]<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where &gt; &g= t; &gt; Konqueror still<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; runs circles around it. For example, if you want a &gt; &gt;= &gt; horizontal split<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; or more than one split. =C2=A0Also, I don&#39;t think Dolphi= n has &gt; &gt; &gt; the file<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden &gt; &gt;= &gt; monsters in your<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; ~.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; du ~ | sort -r -n | less<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; This is exactly why linux is shit.<br> <br> s/linux/posix compliant operating system/<br> <br> &gt;<br> &gt; :-)<br> <br> But remember everything you eat has almost certainly been grown using<br> that exact substance.<br> <br> </blockquote> <br></div><div class=3D"im"> I think you&#39;ve gotta be pretty lucky these days if everything you eat i= s<br> actually grown in that substance...<br> Commercial agriculture isn&#39;t what it used to be...<br> </div></blockquote> <br> Here in Germany, there are always lot of discussions about the<br> current state of affairs.<br> </blockquote></div><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">I wish the rest of = us could say the same.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">We&#39;re a pathetic= patsy nation that just does whatever the yanks tell us to.</div></div> --089e01633baafd3a8504e6da5f1d--
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "David Eagen" <davideagen mailinator.com> writes:
On Saturday, 21 September 2013 at 01:05:02 UTC, Manu wrote:
 I wish the rest of us could say the same.
 We're a pathetic patsy nation that just does whatever the yanks 
 tell us to.

But we're suckers for Aussie and English accents. We'll be so distracted by how you sound that we won't pay attention to what you say. Yank 1: Did he just ask us to put our military under their generals? Yank 2: Did you hear they way he said "today you will serve us"? That was awesome! This guy's great, we should do whatever he wants!
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Danni Coy <danni.coy gmail.com> writes:
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote:
 On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 [...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konqueror still
 runs circles around it. For example, if you want a horizontal split
 or more than one split.  Also, I don't think Dolphin has the file
 size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden monsters in your
 ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

This is exactly why linux is shit.
 :-)


By far the best way of doing that I have found of dealing with that problem is the program filelight. I have tried to find something as good on windows but so far no dice. As far as I can tell Dolphin was an attempt to take the best features of konqueror and make them discoverable if not as flexible.
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling parent "Minas" <minas_mina1990 hotmail.co.uk> writes:
I use mono develop (on ubuntu).
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Justin Whear <justin economicmodeling.com> writes:
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:51:41 -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:

 On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 09:53:34PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 17:04:46 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
It's a miniscule time savings, but it does add up when you're editing
a complex command-line pipeline.

You know what would actually be huge for me? The mouse. If you have a 200 character command line, just clicking it would be so nice. I'm sure there's some ctrl+meta+alt that can do it too, but I don't know my emacs (and readline's vi mode is weak).

There's a vi mode to readline?? My ideal, actually, would be to liberate the command-line from its single-line restriction. It would be in insert mode by default, to cater for the common case, but hitting ESC would put it into navigation mode, where you can use vi movement keys to navigate. You could construct the command in a block (almost like a one-off shell script) before committing and executing it.

Do you know about C-x C-e? If EDITOR is set to "vi" it should open the current command in vi as a temp file, allow you to edit, and when you write and quit it'll execute it. Not sure if this is Bash only or universal.
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 23:35:00 UTC, Justin Whear wrote:
 On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:51:41 -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:

 On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 09:53:34PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 17:04:46 UTC, H. S. Teoh 
 wrote:
It's a miniscule time savings, but it does add up when 
you're editing
a complex command-line pipeline.

You know what would actually be huge for me? The mouse. If you have a 200 character command line, just clicking it would be so nice. I'm sure there's some ctrl+meta+alt that can do it too, but I don't know my emacs (and readline's vi mode is weak).

There's a vi mode to readline?? My ideal, actually, would be to liberate the command-line from its single-line restriction. It would be in insert mode by default, to cater for the common case, but hitting ESC would put it into navigation mode, where you can use vi movement keys to navigate. You could construct the command in a block (almost like a one-off shell script) before committing and executing it.

Do you know about C-x C-e? If EDITOR is set to "vi" it should open the current command in vi as a temp file, allow you to edit, and when you write and quit it'll execute it. Not sure if this is Bash only or universal.

Bash only AFAIK, although there's probably alternatives for other shells. Nice feature, very useful :)
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 22:53:04 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 There's a vi mode to readline??

yeah, in bash you can enable it with set -o vi I've found some little problems with it, though your mileage may vary. One is that terminal escape sequences might mess it up. For example, in my rxvt, if I hit the end key, it uppercases the next few characters: my rxvt sends ^[[7~ on home, which the vi mode sees as 7~. But, in the default (emacs) mode, all these keys work. So I think the escape sequence is being misinterpreted as a series of user input. On my xterm however, it works correctly. Another weird thing is when you hit a number, so I hit 3, it says: me arsd:~$ tESTING vi mode <hit 3 now> (arg: 3) tESTING vi mode Which I guess isn't that bad, it is just different.... but here's something awesome: if you hit v, it actually brings up the actual vi (probably $EDITOR, since it loaded vim for me whereas my plain vi is elvis) to edit the command line! That might just be your idea: edit it by hitting esc v. So you know, I think it is time I give this another try. Time to edit bashrc...
 In fact, now that I think of it, my use cases for C-s has 
 drastically diminished over the years.

Aye, but I agree it is useful from time to time. I've used it on ssh too, or when building or running something like mplayer that just won't shut up long enough to scroll back. BTW I used to not know about ^Q, so if I accidentally hit ^S, I'd get pissed at it freezing and not know what to do!
 Just enough to be able to render window titles in UTF-8 
 correctly.

eh, I'm not sure which X function does it, but that's small enough you could just render it as a pixmap and draw it that way. (This is the way gtk and qt do all text!) On my github, you can also find stb_truetype.d which renders ttfs to little images without dependencies (it is a port of the stb_truetype.h public domain C file). The D api portion is still incomplete but there's enough there to use it, and I *think* I did unicode correctly.
 I see. Thanks for the tip, I'll have to keep that in mind in 
 case I run into similar issues. :)

there's a good chance you'll be ok with a switch/router instead of a hub. I actually got the hub so I could sniff the network traffic from my brother.... but I never actually did any of that and instead set it up as the upstairs hub, so I'd only have to run one long wire from the router downstairs. But the problem is that hub was kinda slow and would get packet collisions fairly often. A switch, or maybe even a 10/100 hub, would probably work a lot better.
 I ran at 800x600 for many years, before I upgraded to a 
 1600x1200 LCD monitor.

that's huge! The one I have now is 1280x1024, the biggest I've ever used. (I notice you are using 4:3 too. 4:3 rox.)
 Really? I remember trying it, but the non-ASCII characters came 
 out all wrong.

I might be wrong.
 Speaking of which, have you had a chance to look at the latest 
 breakage with DMD git HEAD yet?

I just did, and it worked, though I had to grab updated druntime and phobos too. ./dmd -c ~/arsd/terminal.d -I~/d/wtf/druntime-master/src/ -I~/d/wtf/phobos-master/ # silence is good! me arsd:~/d/wtf/dmd-master/src$
 I might just be able to get rid of my GUI browser dependence 
 once and for all. :)

arguably it'd still be a gui, since it'd need to run in graphics mode and all! Just a *great* gui. I think links can actually be configured to run a svgamodelib helper program to display images one by one in the linux terminal too...
 I do remember that feature in the BIOS, actually. I also 
 remember it was horrifically slow. In fact, I reinvented
 my own text output system in
 assembly which was orders of magnitude faster.

Aye, all BIOS text output was brutally slow, I'm sure just about every DOS programmer did their own text output at one point or another! In text mode, you just write to segment 0xb800, and in graphics mode what I did was blit some little bitmaps over. Wrote my own bitmap font editor too. Actually, I recently ported some of my old DOS drawing stuff to D, called image_basicdrawing.d. Does bresenham's line algorithm, ellipses, and bitmapped text. I haven't put it to github yet though because I'm pretty sure I copy/pasted half that code back in the day and thus aren't sure about the copyright status!
 The first thing I'd do if I were to write a terminal spec is to 
 get rid of the stupid dependence on ESC as the terminal control 
 escape code.

god yes, especially on input. This is another thing (omg back to the roots of this hijack!) that Windows just does so much better. Raw console input on Windows is delivered as INPUT_RECORD structs: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms683499%28v=vs.85%29.aspx which is nice and structured. Extensible, unambigious, and a lot less hideous than the mess of input sequences you can get on linux. I guess it is less efficient over ssh, but it is so much simpler. Though, an easy fix to the unix thing: make your esc key send it twice. So ^[^[ == user hit esc, similarly to how "\\" is `\`. At least then it won't be as messy. Sending it twice might even be more backward compatible since a lot of unix programs either specifically watch for the second esc, or at least ignore the second one already since that's a fairly common manual workaround for the crappy design. If I was doing it from scratch, I'd probably say plain input is one byte, escape is either ^[ with ^[^[ the literal esc, or an invalid utf-8 byte like you said, though that might reduce error detection, and anything else is a struct: <ESC>size_of_struct type_of_event event_data....\n (or something). The data could be binary or ascii, whatever, but this way you could skip it by only knowing the size (unlike the termcap mess on linux), it could embed arbitrary data in there, and is unambiguous. Another thing that might be nice is to make sure it is all invalid utf bytes, but encoding data that way would get long. But then you could ignore it even if you missed the size - would be nice to recover a broken stream. I'd do output similarly too. Escape sequences on output aren't nearly as nasty as on input - you probably don't output an esc character most the time - but still they should be structured enough so you can easily ignore unknown ones and be a little more binary safe. Then you output a png image in that same set too!
 rather than being constantly interrupted by dings and beeps and 
 popups,

i love beeps lol modprobe pcspkr
 I never leave the title as 'rxvt'; I wrote a little program 
 that writes the escape sequence to change the window title to 
 the command-line args,

I did one of those too (a shell script too lol) but I do it spacially or transiently anyway - my rxvts either live long enough that I get to know them by position on the taskbar, or they are gone so quickly that it doesn't matter. Another hassle is screen sometimes doesn't propagate that correctly which is annoying too...
 Yeah I should stop talking about ratpoison replacements, and 
 actually go write one. In D. With ranges. :-P

lol ranges
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 at 00:03:34 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe 
wrote:
 set -o vi

better yet, edit ~/.inputrc and add set editing-mode vi in there. Then it works for other programs that use readline too like mysql! I almost forgot about that file, but there's a comment in there that I added some sequences for rxvt, so sweet. That file might be a good thing to customize the hell out of.
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Saturday, September 14, 2013 22:00:02 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 And besides, KDE and GNOME have always been about giving a more
 Windows-like (or mac-like) feel to Linux, and in no small part for
 the sake of new Linux users. Plus, the latest ones, KDE4 and GNOME3
 were largely about re-designing things in hopes of making them easier
 still. (At least that's been my understanding.)

KDE 4 was more about redesigning KDE's architecture. They went with a less cartoony look and feel by default than they had for KDE 3, but ultimately, KDE 4 is a _lot_ like KDE 3, only built in a much cleaner and modular manner underneat the hood. It's main problem was that the developers released it when it still wasn't really ready (because the app developers wouldn't port to it until they released, and KDE 4 wouldn't really be ready until the app developers had ported stuff to it and found bugs - a bit of a catch 22), so initially, KDE 4 had a _lot_ of problems, which gave it a bit of a bad rep. But at this point, it works as well as KDE 3 did, and most of the features are essentially the same. Some aspects of both KDE 3 and KDE 4 are quite Windows- like (albeit generally more feature-full than what Windows provides for the same thing), though I think that it's more a case of simply not redesigning things that didn't need redesigning rather than trying to emulate Windows. As for Gnome 3, I don't know what they're smoking. It's one of the most bizarre DEs ever - enough so that there are at least two major Gnome 2 clones floating around (IIRC, one is actually a fork of gnome 2, and the other is a fork of gnome 3 made to look like gnome 2), and a lot people seem to hate Gnome 3. At least KDE hasn't tried to completely change its basic UI paradigms like Gnome 3 did. Oh well. Unfortunately, DEs tend to end up being an almost religious argument. I'm a big fan of KDE, so that's what I tend to promote, and I really don't understand some of what the Unity and Gnome guys have been up to (or the Windows 8 guys for that matter), as I'm of the opinion that the basic UI paradigms that we've had since Win95 (if not before) really don't need to be redesigned. We've had plenty of incremental improvements over the years, which is great, but it seems like the UI guys just can't accept that you don't need to keep completely redesigning stuff. It's not like we redesign door knobs or pots all the time. We found basic designs for them which work, and we've stuck with them, and at most, new designs are variations on the same basic design rather than being completely new. Unfortunately, it seems like the UI guys just can't accept that UIs are the same. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 14 2013
parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 15.09.2013 09:50, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
 ...
From what I've heard, Kubuntu is one of the worst KDE distros out there, but I

in general. These days, I use Arch. - Jonathan M Davis

Mandrake and SuSE were the best ones for KDE. Mandrake is now gone. Mandriva does not count. SuSE screwed themselves by making patent agreements with Microsoft, thus moving the community away from them. So nowadays I think even with its second class treatment, Kubuntu still tends to be the best option for most KDE users that want proper mainstream hardware support on their distributions. -- Paulo
Sep 15 2013
parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 15.09.2013 10:48, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
 On Sunday, September 15, 2013 10:22:13 Paulo Pinto wrote:
 Am 15.09.2013 09:50, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
 ...

From what I've heard, Kubuntu is one of the worst KDE distros out there,
 but I>>

distros in general. These days, I use Arch. - Jonathan M Davis

Mandrake and SuSE were the best ones for KDE. Mandrake is now gone. Mandriva does not count. SuSE screwed themselves by making patent agreements with Microsoft, thus moving the community away from them. So nowadays I think even with its second class treatment, Kubuntu still tends to be the best option for most KDE users that want proper mainstream hardware support on their distributions.

As I understand it, a large portion of OpenSuSE users are KDE users rather than gnome users, and I've almost never heard anyone say anything good about Kubuntu as far as KDE goes. Almost everyone who talks about it seems to talk about how poor a KDE distro it is. I used to use OpenSuSE, and I really have no complaints about their support of KDE. They actually seem to really go the extra mile to make sure that everything is well integrated and works. And while there were certainly complaints about their patent agreements with Microsoft, I'm not aware of much negative actually coming from that. I'm not even sure that any of those are still in effect, particularly since SuSE was sold. I'm quite surprised to see someone claiming that Kubuntu is better than OpenSuSE with regards to KDE. - Jonathan M Davis

I did not say that. I said that because of the Microsoft agreement, many SuSE users left the distribution and went elsewhere. Additionally, that (K)Ubuntu happens to have better hardware support than SuSE, specially in terms of laptops. SuSE used to be the home of many KDE and Qt developers, and had a huge community in Europe, specially in Germany, its home country. Nowadays you see them trying to sell themselves together with SAP for enterprise deployments and I have no clue how good the KDE support still is. -- Paulo
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 20:44:45 -0700
Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:

 On Saturday, September 14, 2013 22:00:02 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 And besides, KDE and GNOME have always been about giving a more
 Windows-like (or mac-like) feel to Linux, and in no small part for
 the sake of new Linux users. Plus, the latest ones, KDE4 and GNOME3
 were largely about re-designing things in hopes of making them
 easier still. (At least that's been my understanding.)

KDE 4 was more about redesigning KDE's architecture. They went with a less cartoony look and feel by default than they had for KDE 3, but ultimately, KDE 4 is a _lot_ like KDE 3, only built in a much cleaner and modular manner underneat the hood. It's main problem was that the developers released it when it still wasn't really ready (because the app developers wouldn't port to it until they released, and KDE 4 wouldn't really be ready until the app developers had ported stuff to it and found bugs - a bit of a catch 22), so initially, KDE 4 had a _lot_ of problems, which gave it a bit of a bad rep. But at this point, it works as well as KDE 3 did, and most of the features are essentially the same. Some aspects of both KDE 3 and KDE 4 are quite Windows- like (albeit generally more feature-full than what Windows provides for the same thing), though I think that it's more a case of simply not redesigning things that didn't need redesigning rather than trying to emulate Windows.

Hmm, maybe KDE4 really has finally been sorted out, but when I tried it it *wasn't* a particularly early version. I'm pretty sure it was around 4.5-ish, give or take a point release. By that point people were saying the issues had been ironed out. But it was still kinda buggy (ex: the desktop just plain didn't work approx ~60% or so of the times I booted - entirely by random AFAICS), a bit slow, things were inconsistent, lots of little "lack of polish" things, and I didn't like the whole notification system (which didn't seem very well-made anyway. Ex: there were sooo many times I thought a directory copy was finished and then several second later...Oh look, a giant interruption telling me, among several other oversized stacked up bits of info I don't care about, that *now* the file copy is done). But I dunno, this was part of Kubuntu, and I understand Canonical tended to treat that as a second-class version, so maybe they'd messed it up somehow?
 Oh well. Unfortunately, DEs tend to end up being an almost religious
 argument. I'm a big fan of KDE, so that's what I tend to promote, and
 I really don't understand some of what the Unity and Gnome guys have
 been up to (or the Windows 8 guys for that matter),

I really need to at least give Unity a try. I've avoided it because I didn't like the goals/motivations/theories they had been giving for it, but I don't *actually* know how it works. I should at least fire up a new scratch VM with a Live Disc iso and find out. Windows 8 is just plain insane. After using it, I could have easily mistaken it for a bad prank if I hadn't already known better. It seems to be a clear reflection of MS's famed lack of internal coherence. It's as if they're just flailing around randomly as part of some last-ditch pre-mortem spasms. That's the only way I can think to account for it.
 as I'm of the
 opinion that the basic UI paradigms that we've had since Win95 (if
 not before) really don't need to be redesigned. We've had plenty of
 incremental improvements over the years, which is great, but it seems
 like the UI guys just can't accept that you don't need to keep
 completely redesigning stuff. It's not like we redesign door knobs or
 pots all the time. We found basic designs for them which work, and
 we've stuck with them, and at most, new designs are variations on the
 same basic design rather than being completely new. Unfortunately, it
 seems like the UI guys just can't accept that UIs are the same.
 

Agreed. I've seen a lot of fanboyism about "it's the future, just accept it" and how I'm horrible for not being interested in trying to adapt myself to it. I've already posted my feelings on it here: https://semitwist.com/articles/article/view/don-t-be-a-trend-chump Put simply, you're absolutely right about gratuitous redesigns: It used to be people *understood* how "time-tested and battle-proven; tried and true" was a reason to *use* something, not compulsively abandon it out of some irrational fear of "passe".
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Sunday, September 15, 2013 02:36:33 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 Hmm, maybe KDE4 really has finally been sorted out, but when I tried it
 it *wasn't* a particularly early version. I'm pretty sure it was around
 4.5-ish, give or take a point release. By that point people were saying
 the issues had been ironed out. But it was still kinda buggy (ex: the
 desktop just plain didn't work approx ~60% or so of the times I booted
 - entirely by random AFAICS), a bit slow, things were inconsistent,
 lots of little "lack of polish" things, and I didn't like the whole
 notification system (which didn't seem very well-made anyway. Ex: there
 were sooo many times I thought a directory copy was finished and then
 several second later...Oh look, a giant interruption telling me, among
 several other oversized stacked up bits of info I don't care about,
 that *now* the file copy is done).

You can customize KDE quite a bit, including what notifications you get. So, you should be able to get rid of all of the notifications that you don't want by tweaking the settings in whatever program is sending the notification. For the most part, I have no problem with them though. They generally pop up on the task bar and then disappear a few seconds later. But as to whether, KDE will work well enough for you or suit your tastes at this point, I have no idea. Overall, KDE 4 has improved quite a lot over time and bugs get fixed every release, but new bugs get introduced sometimes as well, so how much you're going to be annoyed by bugs is going to depend a lot on what you're doing I suspect. I think that almost all of the bugs that I've dealt with in KDE for quite a while now have been in kmail (their move to akonadi for the backend has been an unmitigated disaster IMHO - the whole semantic desktop thing that they're trying to do with kdepim has been horribly implemented and we would have been much better off without it). Unfortunately, I don't like the UIs of any of the mail readers that I've tried anywhere near as much. They're all missing features that I really like in kmail. I'll probably just have to write my own mail reader one of these days to get one that both has the features I want and doesn't have any serious problems.
 But I dunno, this was part of Kubuntu, and I understand Canonical
 tended to treat that as a second-class version, so maybe they'd messed
 it up somehow?

From what I've heard, Kubuntu is one of the worst KDE distros out there, but I 

in general. These days, I use Arch. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Sunday, September 15, 2013 10:22:13 Paulo Pinto wrote:
 Am 15.09.2013 09:50, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
 ...
 
From what I've heard, Kubuntu is one of the worst KDE distros out there,
but I>>

distros in general. These days, I use Arch. - Jonathan M Davis

Mandrake and SuSE were the best ones for KDE. Mandrake is now gone. Mandriva does not count. SuSE screwed themselves by making patent agreements with Microsoft, thus moving the community away from them. So nowadays I think even with its second class treatment, Kubuntu still tends to be the best option for most KDE users that want proper mainstream hardware support on their distributions.

As I understand it, a large portion of OpenSuSE users are KDE users rather than gnome users, and I've almost never heard anyone say anything good about Kubuntu as far as KDE goes. Almost everyone who talks about it seems to talk about how poor a KDE distro it is. I used to use OpenSuSE, and I really have no complaints about their support of KDE. They actually seem to really go the extra mile to make sure that everything is well integrated and works. And while there were certainly complaints about their patent agreements with Microsoft, I'm not aware of much negative actually coming from that. I'm not even sure that any of those are still in effect, particularly since SuSE was sold. I'm quite surprised to see someone claiming that Kubuntu is better than OpenSuSE with regards to KDE. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 00:50:18 -0700
Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:
 
 But as to whether, KDE will work well enough for you or suit your
 tastes at this point, I have no idea. Overall, KDE 4 has improved
 quite a lot over time and bugs get fixed every release, but new bugs
 get introduced sometimes as well, so how much you're going to be
 annoyed by bugs is going to depend a lot on what you're doing I
 suspect.
 

It probably is worth at least another try. Looks like there have been a considerable number of releases since I last tried (not surprised, it was a few years ago).
 I think that almost all of the bugs that I've dealt with in KDE for
 quite a while now have been in kmail (their move to akonadi for the
 backend has been an unmitigated disaster IMHO - the whole semantic
 desktop thing that they're trying to do with kdepim has been horribly
 implemented and we would have been much better off without it).
 Unfortunately, I don't like the UIs of any of the mail readers that
 I've tried anywhere near as much. They're all missing features that I
 really like in kmail. I'll probably just have to write my own mail
 reader one of these days to get one that both has the features I want
 and doesn't have any serious problems.
 

Heh, we may have to collaborate. I've been using Claws Mail, just to finally get off Outlook Express, but it's terribly buggy (at least on Windows). And yet it's *still* my favorite out of everything I've tried, even over Thunderbird :/
 But I dunno, this was part of Kubuntu, and I understand Canonical
 tended to treat that as a second-class version, so maybe they'd
 messed it up somehow?

From what I've heard, Kubuntu is one of the worst KDE distros out
there, but I 

distros in general. These days, I use Arch.

Yea, I don't know if they even still make Kubuntu. Arch is something I've been meaning to keep an eye on, but I'm not ready to leave Debian just yet. It's familiar. And gets the job done. And I don't really have any big complaints about it (aside from the unordered Toy Story naming system! But that's minor.) And I've got other things to do besides try out distros ;)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--001a11c2bf6a97be3404e6692760
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 15, 2013 12:20 AM, "Nick Sabalausky" <
SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 03:41:58 -0700
 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 Of course, Android isn't *completely* free of annoyances. A recent one
 is the inability to completely remove preinstalled apps that I don't
 use and don't intend to use, because they're "system" apps. I'm still
 trying to wrap my head around the concept of Facebook being a
 "system" app... Sigh.

Ugh, that's a new one to me. Mine was version 4.0 (and rooted so I could also swap in and out of 2.3 plus the CyanogenMod versions of both 4.0 and 2.3). It was *definitely* the better of the two, but there were still plenty of things I hated about Andorid, too:

Yes, that's something strange I noticed too. On 2.2 you only had the option to rollback to the version of the app that came with the device. On 4.0 I've noticed that you can *disable* the app, but not remove. Which isn't good - but I suppose that's a technical limitation of how they do system factory resets. Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --001a11c2bf6a97be3404e6692760 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 15, 2013 12:20 AM, &quot;Nick Sabalausky&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto= :SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com">SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com</= a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 03:41:58 -0700<br> &gt; &quot;H. S. Teoh&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx">h= steoh quickfur.ath.cx</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; Of course, Android isn&#39;t *completely* free of annoyances. A r= ecent one<br> &gt; &gt; is the inability to completely remove preinstalled apps that I do= n&#39;t<br> &gt; &gt; use and don&#39;t intend to use, because they&#39;re &quot;system= &quot; apps. I&#39;m still<br> &gt; &gt; trying to wrap my head around the concept of Facebook being a<br> &gt; &gt; &quot;system&quot; app... Sigh.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; Ugh, that&#39;s a new one to me. Mine was version 4.0 (and rooted so I= could<br> &gt; also swap in and out of 2.3 plus the CyanogenMod versions of both 4.0<= br> &gt; and 2.3). It was *definitely* the better of the two, but there were<br=

&gt;</p> <p>Yes, that&#39;s something strange I noticed too.=A0 On 2.2 you only had = the option to rollback to the version of the app that came with the device.= =A0 On 4.0 I&#39;ve noticed that you can *disable* the app, but not remove.= Which isn&#39;t good - but I suppose that&#39;s a technical limitation of = how they do system factory resets.<br> </p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;</p> --001a11c2bf6a97be3404e6692760--
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Arjan <arjan ask.me> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 10:48:38 +0200, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com>  
wrote:

 As I understand it, a large portion of OpenSuSE users are KDE users  
 rather
 than gnome users, and I've almost never heard anyone say anything good  
 about
 Kubuntu as far as KDE goes. Almost everyone who talks about it seems to  
 talk
 about how poor a KDE distro it is. I used to use OpenSuSE, and I really  
 have
 no complaints about their support of KDE. They actually seem to really  
 go the
 extra mile to make sure that everything is well integrated and works. And
 while there were certainly complaints about their patent agreements with
 Microsoft, I'm not aware of much negative actually coming from that. I'm  
 not
 even sure that any of those are still in effect, particularly since SuSE  
 was
 sold. I'm quite surprised to see someone claiming that Kubuntu is better  
 than
 OpenSuSE with regards to KDE.

I'm a very happy longtime OpenSuSE KDE user. IMO it is the best linux distro out there for desktop use, they are very serious about supporting KDE. OpenSuSE is really very very stable. They have also a LTS version called 'Evergreen' which is of high quality. Besides this the OBS (open build service) is a great initiative which I think should be used to make distro native packages of DMD available. just my 0.02
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--047d7bf0e6541611e704e669dd37
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 15, 2013 11:45 AM, "Arjan" <arjan ask.me> wrote:
 On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 10:48:38 +0200, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com>

 As I understand it, a large portion of OpenSuSE users are KDE users


 than gnome users, and I've almost never heard anyone say anything good


 Kubuntu as far as KDE goes. Almost everyone who talks about it seems to


 about how poor a KDE distro it is. I used to use OpenSuSE, and I really


 no complaints about their support of KDE. They actually seem to really


 extra mile to make sure that everything is well integrated and works. And
 while there were certainly complaints about their patent agreements with
 Microsoft, I'm not aware of much negative actually coming from that. I'm


 even sure that any of those are still in effect, particularly since SuSE


 sold. I'm quite surprised to see someone claiming that Kubuntu is better


 OpenSuSE with regards to KDE.

I'm a very happy longtime OpenSuSE KDE user. IMO it is the best linux

KDE. OpenSuSE is really very very stable. They have also a LTS version called 'Evergreen' which is of high quality. Besides this the OBS (open build service) is a great initiative which I think should be used to make distro native packages of DMD available.

Don't think I've come across OBS before, how does that differ from, say, PPAs? Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --047d7bf0e6541611e704e669dd37 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 15, 2013 11:45 AM, &quot;Arjan&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:arjan ask= .me">arjan ask.me</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 10:48:38 +0200, Jonathan M Davis &lt;<a href=3D"ma= ilto:jmdavisProg gmx.com">jmdavisProg gmx.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt;&gt; As I understand it, a large portion of OpenSuSE users are KDE user= s rather<br> &gt;&gt; than gnome users, and I&#39;ve almost never heard anyone say anyth= ing good about<br> &gt;&gt; Kubuntu as far as KDE goes. Almost everyone who talks about it see= ms to talk<br> &gt;&gt; about how poor a KDE distro it is. I used to use OpenSuSE, and I r= eally have<br> &gt;&gt; no complaints about their support of KDE. They actually seem to re= ally go the<br> &gt;&gt; extra mile to make sure that everything is well integrated and wor= ks. And<br> &gt;&gt; while there were certainly complaints about their patent agreement= s with<br> &gt;&gt; Microsoft, I&#39;m not aware of much negative actually coming from= that. I&#39;m not<br> &gt;&gt; even sure that any of those are still in effect, particularly sinc= e SuSE was<br> &gt;&gt; sold. I&#39;m quite surprised to see someone claiming that Kubuntu= is better than<br> &gt;&gt; OpenSuSE with regards to KDE.<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; I&#39;m a very happy longtime OpenSuSE KDE user. IMO it is the best li= nux distro out there for desktop use, they are very serious about supportin= g KDE. OpenSuSE is really very very stable. They have also a LTS version ca= lled &#39;Evergreen&#39; which is of high quality. Besides this the OBS (op= en build service) is a great initiative which I think should be used to mak= e distro native packages of DMD available.<br> &gt;</p> <p>Don&#39;t think I&#39;ve come across OBS before, how does that differ fr= om, say, PPAs?</p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;<br> </p> --047d7bf0e6541611e704e669dd37--
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Arjan <arjan ask.me> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 12:51:01 +0200, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:

 Besides this the OBS (open build service) is a great initiative which I  
 think should be used to make distro native packages of DMD available.
  >
 Don't think I've come across OBS before, how does that differ from, say,  
 PPAs?

I don't know PPA that well, I have limited knowledge of OBS but IFAIK OBS is able to deliver multiple package types for multiple distro for multiple distro versions. For example: I needed the HDF5 libs which were not available in the distro or packman repos. I went to build.opensuse.org and search for 'HDF5' and voila: http://software.opensuse.org/package/libhdf5-8 This one provides only rpm based distros. An other example build for a variety of distros: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=openvas-scanner&project=security%3AOpenVAS%3ASTABLE%3Av4 http://openbuildservice.org/ 'learn how to use it' button is a nice introduction video.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 03:44:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 As for Gnome 3, I don't know what they're smoking. It's one of 
 the most
 bizarre DEs ever

After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other desktop manager comfortably. It is truly revolutionary, main problem is that people almost never want revolutions and mostly stick to their habits. Ones that suffer badly with Gnome Shell :)
Sep 15 2013
next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:35:00PM +0000, Justin Whear wrote:
 On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:51:41 -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:

 My ideal, actually, would be to liberate the command-line from its
 single-line restriction. It would be in insert mode by default, to
 cater for the common case, but hitting ESC would put it into
 navigation mode, where you can use vi movement keys to navigate. You
 could construct the command in a block (almost like a one-off shell
 script) before committing and executing it.

Do you know about C-x C-e? If EDITOR is set to "vi" it should open the current command in vi as a temp file, allow you to edit, and when you write and quit it'll execute it. Not sure if this is Bash only or universal.

Whoa. My mind is blown. I'm gonna hafta do this from now on. :) (OK, C-x C-e is so emacs-y, but I do have $EDITOR set to vim, so I'll deal. ;-)) T -- "I'm not childish; I'm just in touch with the child within!" - RL
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 02:03:33AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 22:53:04 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
There's a vi mode to readline??

yeah, in bash you can enable it with set -o vi I've found some little problems with it, though your mileage may vary. One is that terminal escape sequences might mess it up. For example, in my rxvt, if I hit the end key, it uppercases the next few characters: my rxvt sends ^[[7~ on home, which the vi mode sees as 7~. But, in the default (emacs) mode, all these keys work.

Well, now that I just learned about C-x C-e in bash, I think I won't need this anymore. :) Just need to set $EDITOR to vim, and off I go. [...]
Just enough to be able to render window titles in UTF-8 correctly.

eh, I'm not sure which X function does it, but that's small enough you could just render it as a pixmap and draw it that way. (This is the way gtk and qt do all text!)

No kidding! Never knew that. I guess that just shows how b0rken (or antiquated) X11 font handling is. I remember reading through the protocols for it... looks like a valiant attempt at future-proofing, which fell flat because of the unpredictability of what the future might hold. Premature generalization at its finest. :)
 On my github, you can also find stb_truetype.d which renders ttfs to
 little images without dependencies (it is a port of the
 stb_truetype.h public domain C file). The D api portion is still
 incomplete but there's enough there to use it, and I *think* I did
 unicode correctly.

Interesting! I'll have to check it out sometime.
I see. Thanks for the tip, I'll have to keep that in mind in case
I run into similar issues. :)

there's a good chance you'll be ok with a switch/router instead of a hub. I actually got the hub so I could sniff the network traffic from my brother....

lol...
 but I never actually did any of that and instead set it up as the
 upstairs hub, so I'd only have to run one long wire from the router
 downstairs.

I still have an unused hub lying around, after replacing it with a wireless router so that my wife doesn't need to constantly plug in stray ethernet cables just to make her laptop work. Never realized collisions can be so bad on a hub. [...]
I ran at 800x600 for many years, before I upgraded to a 1600x1200
LCD monitor.

that's huge! The one I have now is 1280x1024, the biggest I've ever used. (I notice you are using 4:3 too. 4:3 rox.)

I'm a stickler for 4:3. I *hate* those shortscreen monitors (aka widescreen :-P). It feels like the top got chopped off. I value my vertical real estate! [...]
Speaking of which, have you had a chance to look at the latest
breakage with DMD git HEAD yet?

I just did, and it worked, though I had to grab updated druntime and phobos too. ./dmd -c ~/arsd/terminal.d -I~/d/wtf/druntime-master/src/ -I~/d/wtf/phobos-master/ # silence is good! me arsd:~/d/wtf/dmd-master/src$

Hmm lemme try that again... Yikes, I'm getting an ICE. :-( Gah, looks like it's caused by -property, which is b0rken anyway. I'll take it out of my build file. Sorry for the false alarm!
I might just be able to get rid of my GUI browser dependence once
and for all. :)

arguably it'd still be a gui, since it'd need to run in graphics mode and all! Just a *great* gui.

Right. :) [...]
I do remember that feature in the BIOS, actually. I also remember it
was horrifically slow. In fact, I reinvented my own text output
system in assembly which was orders of magnitude faster.

Aye, all BIOS text output was brutally slow, I'm sure just about every DOS programmer did their own text output at one point or another!

I wrote my text routines with 6-pixel wide fonts instead of the normal 8-pixel font, just so I could cram more text onto the screen. :-P Needless to say, those were the days before I got a clue about typography.
 In text mode, you just write to segment 0xb800, and in graphics mode
 what I did was blit some little bitmaps over. Wrote my own bitmap font
 editor too.

0xb800 -- I remember that! Brings back the memories!
 Actually, I recently ported some of my old DOS drawing stuff to D,
 called image_basicdrawing.d. Does bresenham's line algorithm,
 ellipses, and bitmapped text.
 
 I haven't put it to github yet though because I'm pretty sure I
 copy/pasted half that code back in the day and thus aren't sure
 about the copyright status!

Heh. I was on the other extreme... I reinvented everything from the square wheel to the triangular peg in the round hole. It was free of copyright issues, it's true. But it also mostly sucked. :-P
The first thing I'd do if I were to write a terminal spec is to
get rid of the stupid dependence on ESC as the terminal control
escape code.

god yes, especially on input. This is another thing (omg back to the roots of this hijack!) that Windows just does so much better. Raw console input on Windows is delivered as INPUT_RECORD structs: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms683499%28v=vs.85%29.aspx which is nice and structured. Extensible, unambigious, and a lot less hideous than the mess of input sequences you can get on linux.

Yeah... unfortunately the Unix obsession over everything being a byte stream is coming back to byte us. ;-)
 I guess it is less efficient over ssh, but it is so much simpler.

ssh -C. :) How would you intermix it with character data, though? That's the problem with the Unix design. The control stream and the data stream is intermixed, which is the source of much of the headaches in terminal handling.
 Though, an easy fix to the unix thing: make your esc key send it
 twice. So ^[^[ == user hit esc, similarly to how "\\" is `\`. At
 least then it won't be as messy. Sending it twice might even be more
 backward compatible since a lot of unix programs either specifically
 watch for the second esc, or at least ignore the second one already
 since that's a fairly common manual workaround for the crappy
 design.

Hmm. I've gotta try that sometime. Does XKB support mappings like that? Or that is to say, I'm pretty sure it does but I've no idea how to configure that.
 If I was doing it from scratch, I'd probably say plain input is one
 byte, escape is either ^[ with ^[^[ the literal esc, or an invalid
 utf-8 byte like you said, though that might reduce error detection,
 and anything else is a struct: <ESC>size_of_struct type_of_event
 event_data....\n (or something).

But how would you intersperse structs in the middle of an input stream? I suppose one way is to delimit it with invalid UTF-8 bytes like: 0xFC <binary data> 0xFD but then you have the problem of spewing random garbage to the screen if somehow the 0xFC got lost in transit. Again, it's caused by the Unix obsession of shoehorning everything into a byte stream. :-/
 The data could be binary or ascii, whatever, but this way you could
 skip it by only knowing the size (unlike the termcap mess on linux),
 it could embed arbitrary data in there, and is unambiguous.
 
 Another thing that might be nice is to make sure it is all invalid
 utf bytes, but encoding data that way would get long. But then you
 could ignore it even if you missed the size - would be nice to
 recover a broken stream.

Right. The best solution is to admit that the control stream and the data stream are two different things, and use *two* streams for them. But then you may have trouble with synchronizing the two should there be network lag or packet reordering in between. Bah. Some days you just can't win.
 I'd do output similarly too. Escape sequences on output aren't
 nearly as nasty as on input - you probably don't output an esc
 character most the time - but still they should be structured enough
 so you can easily ignore unknown ones and be a little more binary
 safe.

Yeah no kidding. Nothing like `cat binary.file` turning your terminal settings into mush just because it happens to contain the wrong byte sequences. :-/ But on second thoughts, aren't terminals over raw, unreliable connections pass these days? As long as you have TCP, you should be good to go. The stream API for terminals should automatically escape *all* data, and have a separate set of APIs for sending control sequences. That way the terminal library layer ensures data is always correctly encoded. Writing raw data to a terminal is a dangerous operation anyway.
 Then you output a png image in that same set too!
 
 
rather than being constantly interrupted by dings and beeps and
popups,

i love beeps lol modprobe pcspkr

Heh. I'm the opposite. I hate beeps so much that I specifically configured my kernel to *not* have the pcspkr module. :-P
I never leave the title as 'rxvt'; I wrote a little program that
writes the escape sequence to change the window title to the
command-line args,

I did one of those too (a shell script too lol) but I do it spacially or transiently anyway - my rxvts either live long enough that I get to know them by position on the taskbar, or they are gone so quickly that it doesn't matter. Another hassle is screen sometimes doesn't propagate that correctly which is annoying too...

Yeah, that *is* annoying. But that's more annoying is programs that randomly change the terminal title just 'cos they can. Thankfully, ratpoison lets me hardcode a manually-specified name onto windows, which causes the window's title string to be ignored. This way I can turn off intrusive title changes without the offending program even realizing it. :-P
Yeah I should stop talking about ratpoison replacements, and
actually go write one. In D. With ranges. :-P

lol ranges

Well, ranges are one of D's big selling points, aren't they? :-P I mean after all, a WM is basically a program that processes a *range* of X11 events, outputs a *range* of X11 requests, manages a *range* of windows, etc... T -- Claiming that your operating system is the best in the world because more people use it is like saying McDonalds makes the best food in the world. -- Carl B. Constantine
Sep 16 2013
parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 05:01:18PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 On Thursday, 19 September 2013 at 14:27:14 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
[...]
Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konqueror still
runs circles around it. For example, if you want a horizontal split
or more than one split.  Also, I don't think Dolphin has the file
size view plugin, which is nice for finding hidden monsters in your
~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

home. In kilobytes. It's much less so for visualising where hotspot directories are, let alone seeing the large divisions within them or getting a sense of their relative magnitude. It's accurate, but data that doesn't end with presentation useful for humans is next to worthless.

Well, sort -r returns the heaviest entries at the top, which are generally the directories that add up to the most weight. So it should be relatively easy to narrow down to the entries of interest, which should themselves be pretty big as well, so they will also appear close to the top. The stuff towards the end are all the small files so they can be ignored. Of course, du -m may help with more readable numbers. :)
 shopt -s dotglob; du -sm ~/* | sort -rn | less
 
 ...is a bit closer, but there's a lot of room for improvement.  Even
 the KDE part isn't really optimal (for example, I think reducing the
 recursion one level would be a better default), but it plays to the
 strengths of the human visual system markedly better:
 http://chrisjrob.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/konqueror-file-size-view.png

Ah, that's nice. I didn't realize that's what the size plugin does. Pretty nifty! T -- Debian GNU/Linux: Cray on your desktop.
Sep 19 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 at 01:59:42 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 No kidding! Never knew that. I guess that just shows how b0rken 
 (or antiquated) X11 font handling is.

indeed.
 0xb800 -- I remember that! Brings back the memories!

Oh yeah. This is half the fun of my minimal-d (http://arsdnet.net/dcode/minimal.zip) toy that runs on bare metal (after booting with grub) - I can do some of that stuff again!
 Heh. I was on the other extreme... I reinvented everything from 
 the square wheel to the triangular peg in the round hole.

Oh, I've done my share of that too, but my lines were so slow and Bresenham's algorithm was so fast, so I had to make the switch!
 How would you intermix it with character data, though?

If you have a reliable connection it isn't too bad. You can either define anything outside a struct to be character info or you can have an INPUT_TYPE_CHAR struct that showsit.
 That's the problem with the Unix design. The control stream and 
 the data stream is intermixed, which is the source of much of 
 the headaches in terminal handling.

Yup. I've thought before about doing up to five standard streams: 1) system control in, the event stream 2) user control in, a character stream 3) standard file in, a plain file. might be user control or might be another file 4) standard file out, might be the terminal or might be a file 5) interactive output, the terminal. The #3 and #4 are different from unix stdin/out because they aren't necessarily the terminal. Suppose you want to edit a temporary file. You can'd do echo "initial data" | vi since that would be considered user input and be interpreted by vi as a command. So what you end up doing is something like this echo "initial data" > /tmp/filexxx vi /tmp/filexxx And ditto on output, you'd tell vi to write to the tmpfile since redirecting stdout would screw up the user interactivity. So the other files let you just set up pipes easily without necessarily hijacking the interactivity. But, overall, I think unix does a pretty ok in this department - the system is simple, maybe too simple, but it gets the job done.
 Hmm. I've gotta try that sometime. Does XKB support mappings 
 like that?

I don't know.
 I suppose one way is to delimit it with invalid UTF-8 bytes 
 like:

yea.
 then you have the problem of spewing random garbage to the 
 screen if somehow the 0xFC got lost in transit.

Right... but the connections are reliable enough that we can probably get away with just leaving that to the other layer (tcp or whatever).
 But on second thoughts, aren't terminals over raw, unreliable
 connections passé these days? As long as you have TCP, you 
 should be good to go.

exactly
 Thankfully,ratpoison lets me hardcode a manually-specified name 
 onto windows, which causes the window's title string to be 
 ignored.

cool. Maybe I'll put that in my terminal emulator too...
 Well, ranges are one of D's big selling points, aren't they?

tbh I'm kinda meh on them. When they're great, they're great, but otherwise eh, no need to force them in when it isn't necessary. BTW I did a lot of snippage here since I generally agree, but the big fun is I just spent the last half hour playing with the idea of doing my own terminal emulator again. And you know, that might not be so hard. In just this short time, I got it started: in about 100 lines with simpledisplay.d and eventloop.d as helper libraries, I have it running a basic shell. The hard part is still coming: all the escape sequence nonsense, but that's kinda additive, I can just do each one as I come to them, making it more or less xterm compatible but just enough for the programs I use.... then start doing extensions! Most the work is actually done by forkpty() apparently. It even handles echo automatically and I think it does line buffering too, I'll know more as I play with it. And of course, simpledisplay.d already does a lot of messy Xlib stuff and input events so this might not be that hard at all. ...until I get to the issue of utf8 font output lol.
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 08:51:13PM -0400, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 BTW my terminal emulator is moving along pretty well...
 
 I'm posting this message from it now. On Windows! (It is talking to my
 linux box over an ssh connection. It pipes to/from plink.exe to get
 its data.)
 
 Still a few bugs. In mutt, there's some lines too tall. I think the
 cursor isn't erasing properly as it draws the line with a xor brush.
 And it feels slow on Windows, tho that could be because I'm on an ssh
 link right now, out of the house.
 
 But one of the cool features is I implemented an xterm escape
 sequence... that doesn't actually work in my xterm... that changes the
 cursor shape, and I added a few lines to my .vimrc so the cursor
 changes in insert mode.
 
 It kinda feels like gvim, but it is just plain vim over a simple ssh
 connection. Boss.
 
 Speaking of vim and bugs, if I scroll past long lines, that glitches
 too, but eh it is usable.
 
 So yeah, how exciting, now I'll start adding extensions, and be able
 to use them right over ssh thanks to the Windows one compiling. (It
 also works reasonably well over remote X - I have it pretty efficient,
 only redrawing what it must, even using an XImage for true type fonts.
 But now I'll have all the flexibility I might want.)

This is really late, but I meant to ask, is your code up in github? I'd like to play around with it a bit. T -- Famous last words: I wonder what will happen if I do *this*...
Sep 27 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 27 September 2013 at 17:41:46 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 This is really late, but I meant to ask, is your code up in 
 github? I'd like to play around with it a bit.

Not yet, I'm actually working on it right now though, trying to get X copy/paste working. What an obscure process with just xlib! I just got paste basically working, after I get copy working I'll post it and email you or something. After that, my basic xterm replacement will be set up. Then it is bugs and extensions. I'm still trying to think of a good way to do the extensions - I'd ideally like something that would just be ignored by xterm for compatibility sake, but failing that, at least I need an activation sequence that no other program would even put out. I'm kinda leaning toward something like \033[?5000h to activate it - xterm uses 1000h for its mouse extension function and i believe ignores ones in that pattern it doesn't know. Then once magic mode is activated it can just look for invalid unicode characters to activate a command, perhaps even using a simple checksum so cat /dev/random isn't likely to trigger them. (This would be a lot easier if I didn't care at all about compatibility with existing unix programs!) Worst case, we can use an environment variable to signal the library to never send magic commands, so at least then xterm won't get trash. anyway yeah i'll post it later and let you know.
Sep 27 2013
prev sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
BTW does the email address in your from header work? I just sent 
you a message.
Sep 27 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jordi Sayol <g.sayol yahoo.es> writes:
On 15/09/13 18:50, Dicebot wrote:
 On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 03:44:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 As for Gnome 3, I don't know what they're smoking. It's one of the most
 bizarre DEs ever

After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other desktop manager comfortably. It is truly revolutionary, main problem is that people almost never want revolutions and mostly stick to their habits. Ones that suffer badly with Gnome Shell :)

My case. I use Mate desktop. http://mate-desktop.org/about/ -- Jordi Sayol
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 15/09/13 18:50, Dicebot wrote:
 After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other desktop manager
 comfortably. It is truly revolutionary, main problem is that people almost
never
 want revolutions and mostly stick to their habits. Ones that suffer badly with
 Gnome Shell :)

Oh dear. Does that mean that you and I are doomed to eternal conflict, as I'm a Unity user and really rather like it? :-)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 17:20:42 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:
 On 15/09/13 18:50, Dicebot wrote:
 After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other 
 desktop manager
 comfortably. It is truly revolutionary, main problem is that 
 people almost never
 want revolutions and mostly stick to their habits. Ones that 
 suffer badly with
 Gnome Shell :)

Oh dear. Does that mean that you and I are doomed to eternal conflict, as I'm a Unity user and really rather like it? :-)

Probably :) Well, Unity uses similar principles in many directions though I do like Gnome 3 decision to remove system tray completely and focus on robust notification system instead - that was the main decision factor for me when trying both it and Unity. (also default style aesthetics but that is configurable and hardly that important)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 16:50:50 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
 After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other 
 desktop manager comfortably.

This is actually feel about my custom setup based on the Blackbox window manager. It has a lot of little differences from the other common options: 1) sloppy focus. omg it is so much better than click to focus 2) no click to raise. omg it is so much better, I actually have control over the window's z-order! And alt+click to move windows is soooo convenient. 3) my hotkeys rock. Keyboard control over moving, sizing, hiding, etc., and a one press hotkey to launch my beloved rxvt. 4) I have both the roll up (shading) option and the disappearing (iconification/minimize) option, as well as multiple workspaces. KDE did the workspaces too, they aren't that special, but being able to get a window off the taskbar when I want to is pretty sweet. also shading it while keeping focus and being able to manipulate another window with the mouse at the same time can be pretty boss. 5) The menu, which I rarely use since rxvt rox, is on right click anywhere on the background. No space used by a start button or quick launch, so I can have my typical 20+ windows open at once and not crowd up the taskbar to uselessness. and a bunch of other little things. While any one of these individually isn't a revolution, I sure like it better than kde or windows or anything else I've tried.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 17:32:49 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 16:50:50 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
 After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other 
 desktop manager comfortably.

This is actually feel about my custom setup based on the Blackbox window manager. It has a lot of little differences from the other common options: 1) sloppy focus. omg it is so much better than click to focus ...

What made me fall in love with Gnome 3 was not some small things I can configure / hack on any windows manager, it is the major effort towards single idea "you don't want to see your wm when you work". Distinction between application mode and overview is awesome for similar reasons different vim modes are awesome. Also removing all bloat from screen to notifications. All helps to maintain the context (and I have always had lot of problems with concentration)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Michael" <pr m1xa.com> writes:
KDE, Gnome, Unity, Xfce.... wtf?

Win 8.1 rocks)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 18:21:35 UTC, Michael wrote:
 KDE, Gnome, Unity, Xfce.... wtf?

 Win 8.1 rocks)

I was astonished when had a look at Win 8 preview and have noticed basically Shell / Unity overview as a start screen with only major difference that they have managed to make it ugly as hell :P
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Michael" <pr m1xa.com> writes:
On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 18:24:11 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
 On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 18:21:35 UTC, Michael wrote:
 KDE, Gnome, Unity, Xfce.... wtf?

 Win 8.1 rocks)

I was astonished when had a look at Win 8 preview and have noticed basically Shell / Unity overview as a start screen with only major difference that they have managed to make it ugly as hell :P

When I working as usual I don't care about UI of OS. I care about a OS API. Win 8.1 maybe come with something disturbing changes, so I'm waiting a final release. In Win 8.1 UI is better than 8.0. On Debian - Xfce ;)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 15/09/13 19:28, Dicebot wrote:
 Probably :) Well, Unity uses similar principles in many directions though I do
 like Gnome 3 decision to remove system tray completely and focus on robust
 notification system instead - that was the main decision factor for me when
 trying both it and Unity. (also default style aesthetics but that is
 configurable and hardly that important)

I confess that I've never actually used Gnome 3 ... who knows, I might love it :-) I was a long-standing KDE user but I started getting curious about Unity round-about the Ubuntu 11.10 release -- I tried it out and thought "OK, this is interesting, I see where they're going, but it's not quite usable for me." When 12.04 came out it had been really well polished, I fell in love with it and switched over. Initially the relative lack of config options felt a bit irritating, but I was surprised how quickly I ceased to miss them. I'm quite excited about the whole "convergence" idea that Ubuntu is pushing for a common UI and operating system across multiple devices, which is another good motivation for me to stick with Unity.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 18:44:21 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:
 I'm quite excited about the whole "convergence" idea that 
 Ubuntu is pushing for a common UI and operating system across 
 multiple devices, which is another good motivation for me to 
 stick with Unity.

Haha, guess what Gnome developers say? "We want it to become Gnome OS" :P
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 15/09/13 20:50, Dicebot wrote:
 Haha, guess what Gnome developers say? "We want it to become Gnome OS" :P

Yes, and this is something I hope they really succeed at. The computing world is going to be much more fun if it's based around different competing free operating systems rather than proprietary ones.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 16:52:40 +0200
Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:

 On 2013-09-14 11:43, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 
 I've tried Total Commander on Windows, which is another program
 modeled after Norton Commander. It's probably the only file manager
 in the world that's even less to my taste than OSX's Finder.
 However, I do keep it around because its multiple-file-renaming
 tool is freaking awesome.

Finder in Mac OS X sucks. In the next version of Mac OS X it's going to get tabs, finally. Actually who cares, I'm already using Path Finder since many years: http://www.cocoatech.com/pathfinder/

Nice. If I ever end up with another Mac for one reason or another, I'm totally getting that program.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:32:48PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 16:50:50 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other desktop
manager comfortably.

This is actually feel about my custom setup based on the Blackbox window manager. It has a lot of little differences from the other common options: 1) sloppy focus. omg it is so much better than click to focus

Back when I was still using a GUI, sloppy focus was one of the only things that made it tolerable to use. <rant> Have you ever tried to configure sloppy focus on Windows? I have. I don't know if it's still possible, but there used to be a setting for this. Unfortunately... EVERYTHING breaks once you turn it on. And by everything, I mean, literally, EVERYTHING. You've no idea how much click-to-focus is unconsciously assumed by just about every Windows app that ever existed. When that assumption breaks, all the flaws and misdesigns of typical badly-written GUI code come to the forefront. Don't try it at home; it will leave you scarred for life. </rant>
 2) no click to raise. omg it is so much better, I actually have
 control over the window's z-order! And alt+click to move windows is
 soooo convenient.
 
 3) my hotkeys rock. Keyboard control over moving, sizing, hiding,
 etc., and a one press hotkey to launch my beloved rxvt.

In ratpoison it's a two-key combination to launch a terminal, and of course I have that defaulted to rxvt-unicode.
 4) I have both the roll up (shading) option and the disappearing
 (iconification/minimize) option, as well as multiple workspaces. KDE
 did the workspaces too, they aren't that special, but being able to
 get a window off the taskbar when I want to is pretty sweet.

<rant about inability to do this in Windows deleted/> ;-)
 also shading it while keeping focus and being able to manipulate
 another window with the mouse at the same time can be pretty boss.

Cool.
 5) The menu, which I rarely use since rxvt rox, is on right click
 anywhere on the background. No space used by a start button or quick
 launch, so I can have my typical 20+ windows open at once and not
 crowd up the taskbar to uselessness.

Heh. I just use 'bg', 'jobs', and 'fg' on a single terminal. :) Usually, though, I have a bunch of terminals open, each dedicated to a specific purpose, and within each a number of suspended jobs managed by the aforementioned commands. T -- All men are mortal. Socrates is mortal. Therefore all men are Socrates.
Sep 15 2013
next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 04:25:50AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 at 01:59:42 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:

Heh. I was on the other extreme... I reinvented everything from
the square wheel to the triangular peg in the round hole.

Oh, I've done my share of that too, but my lines were so slow and Bresenham's algorithm was so fast, so I had to make the switch!

I never got that far. :-P
How would you intermix it with character data, though?

If you have a reliable connection it isn't too bad. You can either define anything outside a struct to be character info or you can have an INPUT_TYPE_CHAR struct that showsit.

Actually, that gives me an idea. What if, instead of defaulting to character data, the terminal input stream defaults to control structures? That is, you're sending structs by default. Character data would then be represented as a length followed by the data, and the length would be chosen based on how much data is currently available. So, say we use a single byte for length, then we can reserve lengths with the high bit set to non-character control data, and values from 0-127 indicates how many subsequent data bytes follow. Of course, a 0 length is kinda useless, but perhaps could be used for EOF or other such indications. This lets us send up to 127 bytes of data (128 including the length) per message, which should minimize the overhead of defaulting to control mode instead of pure data mode.
That's the problem with the Unix design. The control stream and
the data stream is intermixed, which is the source of much of the
headaches in terminal handling.

Yup. I've thought before about doing up to five standard streams: 1) system control in, the event stream 2) user control in, a character stream 3) standard file in, a plain file. might be user control or might be another file 4) standard file out, might be the terminal or might be a file 5) interactive output, the terminal. The #3 and #4 are different from unix stdin/out because they aren't necessarily the terminal. Suppose you want to edit a temporary file. You can'd do echo "initial data" | vi since that would be considered user input and be interpreted by vi as a command. So what you end up doing is something like this echo "initial data" > /tmp/filexxx vi /tmp/filexxx And ditto on output, you'd tell vi to write to the tmpfile since redirecting stdout would screw up the user interactivity.

I'm not sure what the bash syntax is, but couldn't you just pipe echo to, say, fd 3 (altin?)? Assuming that vim is changed to understand that, of course. If this convention becomes widely adopted, then it would effectively become "non-terminal input". Similarly, fd 4 could be used as altout, for non-terminal output. As a transition, programs could check if fd 3 and fd 4 are valid fd's; if they are, then assume the shell (or whatever invoked the process) knows about altin/altout and wants to send data along those channels, and adapt accordingly.
 So the other files let you just set up pipes easily without
 necessarily hijacking the interactivity.

Yep. Though I think nowadays some programs already check whether stdin/stdout is hooked up to a terminal (IIRC using one of those obscure ioctl calls). I know for sure pagers like 'less' do it: if stdout is a non-terminal, it simply pipes the data through without attempting to page.
 But, overall, I think unix does a pretty ok in this department - the
 system is simple, maybe too simple, but it gets the job done.

Yeah, adding more stuff to it makes sense but may introduce a lot more complexity. [...]
Well, ranges are one of D's big selling points, aren't they?

tbh I'm kinda meh on them. When they're great, they're great, but otherwise eh, no need to force them in when it isn't necessary.

I know. :) I was half-kidding.
 BTW I did a lot of snippage here since I generally agree, but the
 big fun is I just spent the last half hour playing with the idea of
 doing my own terminal emulator again.
 
 And you know, that might not be so hard. In just this short time, I
 got it started: in about 100 lines with simpledisplay.d and
 eventloop.d as helper libraries, I have it running a basic shell.
 The hard part is still coming: all the escape sequence nonsense, but
 that's kinda additive, I can just do each one as I come to them,
 making it more or less xterm compatible but just enough for the
 programs I use.... then start doing extensions!

Cool!
 Most the work is actually done by forkpty() apparently. It even
 handles echo automatically and I think it does line buffering too,
 I'll know more as I play with it. And of course, simpledisplay.d
 already does a lot of messy Xlib stuff and input events so this
 might not be that hard at all.
 
 ...until I get to the issue of utf8 font output lol.

Haha, yeah. If I were doing it, I'd say just do .ttf output from the get-go, render it as an image, whatever, just don't even bother with the antiquated X11 font handling. (FWIW I don't even use core X11 fonts on my system anymore, and don't even bother installing them except those that are absolutely, absolutely necessary for the thing to even start.) Then when it comes time to add inline images, just treat it as a very large character with a custom bitmap font. :-P T -- Long, long ago, the ancient Chinese invented a device that lets them see through walls. It was called the "window".
Sep 17 2013
next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 04:56:29PM +1000, Manu wrote:
 On 20 September 2013 14:23, Nick Sabalausky <
 SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:
 
 On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:11:51 +1000
 Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote:

 On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 [...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konqueror
 still runs circles around it. For example, if you want a
 horizontal split or more than one split.  Also, I don't think
 Dolphin has the file size view plugin, which is nice for
 finding hidden monsters in your ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

This is exactly why linux is shit. :-)

It's exactly why those not fluent in Linux believe Linux is shit ;)


 I don't think there's any good reason for that line to make so little
 sense. If the argument is that typing more characters is too hard and
 time consuming, I'd then raise the question as to whether typing
 characters into a shell is the best interface in the first place...?

There is no argument here, actually. The problem is really historical -- names like 'du' or 'grep' or 'awk' meant something back in who knows when, but they no longer mean anything to us today (well, those of us not old enough *cough*). If I were to reinvent Unix today, I'd choose better names for these things. But think about it, if the above line were instead written like this: diskUsage $HOME | sort --reverse --numeric | pager it would make so much more sense, wouldn't it? So the "nonsensical" part is really just in the poor choice of naming, not an inherent weakness of the interface. [...]
 I had a video card driver problem the other day. The bundled auto-update
 app failed, and totally broke my computer.
 I had to download kernel source, and run some scripts to compile some sort
 of shim that made the video driver compatible with my kernel to get it
 working again... absolutely astounding.

Uh... you do realize that this is because Linux actually *lets* you fix things? If something like this happened on Windows, the only real solution is to nuke the system from orbit and start from ground zero again (i.e. reinstall). One can hardly expect that repairing a broken car engine should require no thought. Speaking of which, I managed to totally break my computer last night / this morning too. Well, actually, it was already broken 'cos I upgraded udev to a version incompatible with my kernel (custom-built, so it's my own fault :-P), but the hardy little thing just kept going. It was causing subtle breakages like my printer mysteriously failing to work, and when I finally figured out the problem, I downloaded a new kernel and recompiled it. Only to forget that /vmlinuz was still pointing to the old kernel (I didn't know this until later), so when I rebooted, it dumped me in single-user mode with *nothing* under /dev. Since I have /usr linked to a different mount point, and the mount failed (it couldn't find /dev/sd*), I had only a barely working shell (nothing in /usr/bin, etc., was accessible). No internet access either (eth0 couldn't be found -- anything requiring anything in /dev didn't work 'cos udev was dead). Then I figured that I needed to mknod /dev/sd* so that I can mount my main filesystem and at least begin to recover the system, but I didn't remember what major/minor numbers to use. After poking around a bit (and the whole point of this dreary tale is to make the point that even during catastrophic failure, there is *still* a way to fix things... I couldn't even begin to imagine what I'd do if Windows broke on me like this -- since the GUI wouldn't even start, there'd be no way at all to recover), I stumbled upon a lucky break: /proc/partitions lists major/minor numbers and conveniently maps them to hard drive partitions. A few mknod's later, my main FS was back up, and enough was functional that I could actually recompile the kernel. That turned out to be unnecessary, though, because the mistake was in the /vmlinuz symlink, not in the kernel itself. Once I found that, the fix was trivial, and now I'm back in business. :-P The thing that a lot of people don't seem to realize is that even system utilities and upgrade apps are written by people, and therefore prone to stupid mistakes. Under such circumstances, what you need is the ability to get under the hood and fix things when they go wrong... not to have the hood welded shut and have only OS reinstallation as a recourse. Because of that, I'd still prefer Linux with all its quirks than Windows with all of its perfections, because on Linux I at least have a fighting chance to fix stuff that breaks (as they inevitably will, regardless of OS), whereas on Windows the only real recourse is the big red button. T -- My program has no bugs! Only undocumented features...
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 12:16:39 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 There is no argument here, actually. The problem is really 
 historical -- names like 'du' or 'grep' or 'awk' meant
 something back in who knows  when, but they no longer mean
 anything to us today (well, those of us not old enough *cough*).

heh, though if you're inundated enough, these words take on a meaning of their own. One time, I said "kill(1) the process" then went on to explain what kill is... and a person replied "you don't have to be so condescending, we know what kill means." But, when writing it, I was still thinking kill is this foreign language and thus needed a definition for the newbies, in the same sense that grep would. I forgot 'kill' has a perfectly relevant meaning in everyday English.... Though I probably could have defended myself by retorting with kill -HUP. No, that doesn't terminate it, that makes it reread its configuration file. See, kill(1) just sends a signal. What's HUP mean? Hang up! It is sent when your terminal disconnects because that was literally hanging up the phone back in the day. "but then why does that make it reread its config file" lol
 	diskUsage $HOME | sort --reverse --numeric | pager

starting to look like Microsoft Powershell! Interestingly though, powershell offers a lot of short, unix style aliases though. They know our habits can be hard to break.
 Uh... you do realize that this is because Linux actually *lets* 
 you fix things?

so does Windows.... it is different, things like safe mode or the recovery console, but you can do it if you know how. Though Windows takes more care to avoid these mistakes in the first place too.
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "JN" <666total wp.pl> writes:
On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 12:16:39 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Uh... you do realize that this is because Linux actually *lets* 
 you fix
 things? If something like this happened on Windows, the only 
 real
 solution is to nuke the system from orbit and start from ground 
 zero
 again (i.e. reinstall). One can hardly expect that repairing a 
 broken
 car engine should require no thought.

When was the last time you used Windows? Since Vista, if a graphics driver crashes, I usually get a black screen for few seconds, then a nice window saying "The GPU driver has crashed, windows has restarted it". If it really breaks, it's a matter of going into Safe Mode and installing the driver again. But overall, Windows is almost uncrashable as long as you don't have a defective device. On Linux? hah, bad driver will lock you out of the system, installations regularly break. Closing the system? Oh let me just flash random gibberish that looks like memory corruption, then some log messages where it's "FATAL ERROR" every third line. No thanks, I prefer my stable system.
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Wyatt" <wyatt.epp gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 14:05:20 UTC, JN wrote:
 On Linux? hah, bad driver will lock you out of the system, 
 installations regularly break. Closing the system? Oh let me 
 just flash random gibberish that looks like memory corruption, 
 then some log messages where it's "FATAL ERROR" every third 
 line. No thanks, I prefer my stable system.

You sound like a Fedora user (in which case, you have my condolences).
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 04:24:21PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
[...]
 one of the reasons I haven't played many new games this century is
 that they had already achieved gaming perfection in the 90's and I'd
 just prefer to replay them!)

I dunno, I find that my good memories of those old games are quite tainted by nostalgia. I remember firing up dosbox recently and playing through some of my old favorite games, and discovering to my chagrin that they are actually *not* as fun as I remember them, and they had many annoyances that have been eliminated in modern games. Of course, they weren't *that* bad -- I still had fun playing them -- but the playing experience doesn't quite measure up to what my memory tells me. Which makes me wonder if perhaps *all* my good memories of the good ole days are fabricated by nostalgia, and not by real gaming perfection. Of course, it's also true that many modern-day games are rather weak on the gameplay side in spite of the heavy eye-candy and multimedia sfx. I find that my favorite modern-day games are either very thought-heavy puzzles, or remakes of old school games that retain the good parts of the old game mechanics while improving on the annoyances that used to plague those old games. A good example of the latter is the Gurk series. While not perfect, it's also a joy to boil the gameplay down to the bare essentials so that you're focusing on actually *playing*, rather than drowning in a multipedia theatre of snazzy 3D effects and surround sound and doing more movie-watching than actually playing. But of course, Gurk is pretty nostalgic too, so maybe my perceptions are also being colored by that. Hmm. :-/
 Anywho, FF1, the graphics are beautiful and the music, needless to
 say, legendary. It really amazes me how much magic they did with a
 random noise channel and three beeps.

The most creative source of sound that I remember, was an Apple II game that deliberately used the floppy drive to make a grinding sound (IIRC during takeoff in a flight sim type game). T -- Shin: (n.) A device for finding furniture in the dark.
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--047d7b5d33d464f9a804e6da5da4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 20 September 2013 22:15, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 04:56:29PM +1000, Manu wrote:
 On 20 September 2013 14:23, Nick Sabalausky <
 SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:

 On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:11:51 +1000
 Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote:

 On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx>



 On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:
 [...]
 Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases where Konqueror
 still runs circles around it. For example, if you want a
 horizontal split or more than one split.  Also, I don't think
 Dolphin has the file size view plugin, which is nice for
 finding hidden monsters in your ~.

du ~ | sort -r -n | less

This is exactly why linux is shit. :-)

It's exactly why those not fluent in Linux believe Linux is shit ;)


 I don't think there's any good reason for that line to make so little
 sense. If the argument is that typing more characters is too hard and
 time consuming, I'd then raise the question as to whether typing
 characters into a shell is the best interface in the first place...?

There is no argument here, actually. The problem is really historical -- names like 'du' or 'grep' or 'awk' meant something back in who knows when, but they no longer mean anything to us today (well, those of us not old enough *cough*). If I were to reinvent Unix today, I'd choose better names for these things. But think about it, if the above line were instead written like this: diskUsage $HOME | sort --reverse --numeric | pager it would make so much more sense, wouldn't it? So the "nonsensical" part is really just in the poor choice of naming, not an inherent weakness of the interface.

I'd still argue that it is. It is how it is, and it's completely prohibitive to casual or new users. Where you attribute the cause is fairly irrelevant. I guess the 'inherent' weakness is the natural tendency to abbreviate everything because too much typing on the command line is not considered feasible. [...]
 I had a video card driver problem the other day. The bundled auto-update
 app failed, and totally broke my computer.
 I had to download kernel source, and run some scripts to compile some

 of shim that made the video driver compatible with my kernel to get it
 working again... absolutely astounding.

Uh... you do realize that this is because Linux actually *lets* you fix things? If something like this happened on Windows, the only real solution is to nuke the system from orbit and start from ground zero again (i.e. reinstall). One can hardly expect that repairing a broken car engine should require no thought.

Nothing like that has EVER happened to me in a few decades of windows. In my experience asa linux user, these sort of problems are a daily chore. Speaking of which, I managed to totally break my computer last night /
 this morning too.

No shit. Should I be surprised? ;)
 Well, actually, it was already broken 'cos I upgraded
 udev to a version incompatible with my kernel (custom-built, so it's my
 own fault :-P),

And it didn't pop up a dialog box saying "unable to install, incompatible with your kernel"?
 but the hardy little thing just kept going. It was
 causing subtle breakages like my printer mysteriously failing to work,
 and when I finally figured out the problem, I downloaded a new kernel
 and recompiled it.

... speechless ;)
 Only to forget that /vmlinuz was still pointing to
 the old kernel (I didn't know this until later), so when I rebooted, it
 dumped me in single-user mode with *nothing* under /dev. Since I have
 /usr linked to a different mount point, and the mount failed (it
 couldn't find /dev/sd*), I had only a barely working shell (nothing in
 /usr/bin, etc., was accessible). No internet access either (eth0
 couldn't be found -- anything requiring anything in /dev didn't work
 'cos udev was dead).

 Then I figured that I needed to mknod /dev/sd* so that I can mount my
 main filesystem and at least begin to recover the system, but I didn't
 remember what major/minor numbers to use. After poking around a bit (and
 the whole point of this dreary tale is to make the point that even
 during catastrophic failure, there is *still* a way to fix things... I
 couldn't even begin to imagine what I'd do if Windows broke on me like
 this -- since the GUI wouldn't even start, there'd be no way at all to
 recover), I stumbled upon a lucky break: /proc/partitions lists
 major/minor numbers and conveniently maps them to hard drive partitions.
 A few mknod's later, my main FS was back up, and enough was functional
 that I could actually recompile the kernel.  That turned out to be
 unnecessary, though, because the mistake was in the /vmlinuz symlink,
 not in the kernel itself.

 Once I found that, the fix was trivial, and now I'm back in business.
 :-P

I rest my case. The thing that a lot of people don't seem to realize is that even system
 utilities and upgrade apps are written by people, and therefore prone to
 stupid mistakes. Under such circumstances, what you need is the ability
 to get under the hood and fix things when they go wrong... not to have
 the hood welded shut and have only OS reinstallation as a recourse.
 Because of that, I'd still prefer Linux with all its quirks than Windows
 with all of its perfections, because on Linux I at least have a fighting
 chance to fix stuff that breaks (as they inevitably will, regardless of
 OS), whereas on Windows the only real recourse is the big red button.

I think the main difference is quality-assurance. Windows software is more likely to be released only after it's reasonably proven that it works. I might also challenge the continual assertion that Windows is completely welded shut. The internals of windows are well understood. It's possible for someone to be just as much of a windows nerd as a linux nerd, it's all there if you want to dig through it. Most of the stuff under the hood in windows is also in plain-text or registry keys, all of which are easily accessible to anyone who knows what they're doing. The distinction is though, that windows has successfully offered an os that WORKS, thereby relieving end-users of that burden if they're not interested. I'm not a mechanic, and I shouldn't have to be to drive a car. --047d7b5d33d464f9a804e6da5da4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">On 20 September 2013 22:15, H. S. Teoh <span dir=3D"ltr">&= lt;<a href=3D"mailto:hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx" target=3D"_blank">hsteoh quick= fur.ath.cx</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class= =3D"gmail_quote"> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-= left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p= adding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im">On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 04:56:29PM +1000= , Manu wrote:<br> &gt; On 20 September 2013 14:23, Nick Sabalausky &lt;<br> &gt; <a href=3D"mailto:SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com">SeeWebsiteToCon= tactMe semitwist.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:11:51 +1000<br> &gt; &gt; Manu &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:turkeyman gmail.com">turkeyman gmail.c= om</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; On 20 September 2013 00:25, H. S. Teoh &lt;<a href=3D"mailto= :hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx">hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:04:44PM +0200, Wyatt wrote:<= br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; [...]<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Dolphin is pretty nice, though there are cases whe= re Konqueror<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; still runs circles around it. For example, if you = want a<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; horizontal split or more than one split. =C2=A0Als= o, I don&#39;t think<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Dolphin has the file size view plugin, which is ni= ce for<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; finding hidden monsters in your ~.<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; du ~ | sort -r -n | less<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; This is exactly why linux is shit.<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; :-)<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; It&#39;s exactly why those not fluent in Linux believe Linux is s= hit ;)<br> </div>[...]<br> <div class=3D"im">&gt; I don&#39;t think there&#39;s any good reason for th= at line to make so little<br> &gt; sense. If the argument is that typing more characters is too hard and<= br> &gt; time consuming, I&#39;d then raise the question as to whether typing<b= r> &gt; characters into a shell is the best interface in the first place...?<b= r> <br> </div>There is no argument here, actually. The problem is really historical= --<br> names like &#39;du&#39; or &#39;grep&#39; or &#39;awk&#39; meant something = back in who knows<br> when, but they no longer mean anything to us today (well, those of us<br> not old enough *cough*). If I were to reinvent Unix today, I&#39;d choose<b= r> better names for these things. But think about it, if the above line<br> were instead written like this:<br> <br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 diskUsage $HOME | sort --reverse --numeric | pa= ger<br> <br> it would make so much more sense, wouldn&#39;t it? So the &quot;nonsensical= &quot; part<br> is really just in the poor choice of naming, not an inherent weakness of<br=

it is. It is how it is, and it&#39;s completely prohibitive to casual or n= ew users.</div><div>Where you attribute the cause is fairly irrelevant. I g= uess the &#39;inherent&#39; weakness is the natural tendency to abbreviate = everything because too much typing on the command line is not considered fe= asible.</div> <div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p= x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef= t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"> [...]<br> <div class=3D"im">&gt; I had a video card driver problem the other day. The= bundled auto-update<br> &gt; app failed, and totally broke my computer.<br> &gt; I had to download kernel source, and run some scripts to compile some = sort<br> &gt; of shim that made the video driver compatible with my kernel to get it= <br> &gt; working again... absolutely astounding.<br> <br> </div>Uh... you do realize that this is because Linux actually *lets* you f= ix<br> things? If something like this happened on Windows, the only real<br> solution is to nuke the system from orbit and start from ground zero<br> again (i.e. reinstall). One can hardly expect that repairing a broken<br> car engine should require no thought.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>N= othing like that has EVER happened to me in a few decades of windows.</div>= <div>In my experience asa linux user, these sort of problems are a daily ch= ore.</div> <div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p= x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef= t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"> Speaking of which, I managed to totally break my computer last night /<br> this morning too.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>No shit. Should I be surp= rised? ;)</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"= margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,20= 4,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"> Well, actually, it was already broken &#39;cos I upgraded<br> udev to a version incompatible with my kernel (custom-built, so it&#39;s my= <br> own fault :-P),</blockquote><div><br></div><div>And it didn&#39;t pop up a = dialog box saying &quot;unable to install, incompatible with your kernel&qu= ot;?</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi= n:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204= );border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"> but the hardy little thing just kept going. It was<br> causing subtle breakages like my printer mysteriously failing to work,<br> and when I finally figured out the problem, I downloaded a new kernel<br> and recompiled it.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>... speechless ;)</div><= div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0= px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-le= ft-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"> Only to forget that /vmlinuz was still pointing to<br> the old kernel (I didn&#39;t know this until later), so when I rebooted, it= <br> dumped me in single-user mode with *nothing* under /dev. Since I have<br> /usr linked to a different mount point, and the mount failed (it<br> couldn&#39;t find /dev/sd*), I had only a barely working shell (nothing in<= br> /usr/bin, etc., was accessible). No internet access either (eth0<br> couldn&#39;t be found -- anything requiring anything in /dev didn&#39;t wor= k<br> &#39;cos udev was dead).<br> <br> Then I figured that I needed to mknod /dev/sd* so that I can mount my<br> main filesystem and at least begin to recover the system, but I didn&#39;t<= br> remember what major/minor numbers to use. After poking around a bit (and<br=

during catastrophic failure, there is *still* a way to fix things... I<br> couldn&#39;t even begin to imagine what I&#39;d do if Windows broke on me l= ike<br> this -- since the GUI wouldn&#39;t even start, there&#39;d be no way at all= to<br> recover), I stumbled upon a lucky break: /proc/partitions lists<br> major/minor numbers and conveniently maps them to hard drive partitions.<br=

br> that I could actually recompile the kernel. =C2=A0That turned out to be<br> unnecessary, though, because the mistake was in the /vmlinuz symlink,<br> not in the kernel itself.<br> <br> Once I found that, the fix was trivial, and now I&#39;m back in business.<b= r> :-P<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I rest my case.</div><div><br></div=
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border=

padding-left:1ex"> The thing that a lot of people don&#39;t seem to realize is that even syste= m<br> utilities and upgrade apps are written by people, and therefore prone to<br=

to get under the hood and fix things when they go wrong... not to have<br> the hood welded shut and have only OS reinstallation as a recourse.<br> Because of that, I&#39;d still prefer Linux with all its quirks than Window= s<br> with all of its perfections, because on Linux I at least have a fighting<br=

OS), whereas on Windows the only real recourse is the big red button.<br></= blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think the main difference is quality-assur= ance. Windows software is more likely to be released only after it&#39;s re= asonably proven that it works.</div> <div><br></div><div>I might also challenge the continual assertion that Win= dows is completely welded shut. The internals of windows are well understoo= d.</div><div>It&#39;s possible for someone to be just as much of a windows = nerd as a linux nerd, it&#39;s all there if you want to dig through it. Mos= t of the stuff under the hood in windows is also in plain-text or registry = keys, all of which are easily accessible to anyone who knows what they&#39;= re doing.</div> <div>The distinction is though, that windows has successfully offered an os= that WORKS, thereby relieving end-users of that burden if they&#39;re not = interested.</div><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m not a mechanic, and I shouldn&= #39;t have to be to drive a car.</div> </div></div></div> --047d7b5d33d464f9a804e6da5da4--
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 21 September 2013 at 01:04:19 UTC, Manu wrote:
 I guess the 'inherent' weakness is the natural tendency
 to abbreviate everything because too much
 typing on the command line is not considered feasible.

eh that's what autocomplete is for. But unix has a lot of silly abbreviations. Probably the most infamous: to mount a drive, the command is "mount" to unmount a drive, the command is.... "umount".
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 19:17:45 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 I dunno, I find that my good memories of those old games are 
 quite tainted by nostalgia.

True in some cases, but in others I find myself able to appreciate them even more now. But I avoid the taint by playing them again every few years :)
 many annoyances that have been eliminated in modern games.

Oh, modern games have their own annoyances. For example, the NES would flash or glitch. The playstation three freezes up and disconnects its own CPU with its excessive heat. I'll take the NES though, at least it didn't have such ridiculously long load and boot times! Gameplay wise.... eh, the new games I like tend to be similar to the old games.
 The most creative source of sound that I remember, was an Apple 
 II game that deliberately used the floppy drive to make a 
 grinding sound (IIRC during takeoff in a flight sim type game).

There's a youtube channel devoted to stuff like that: this guy uses old computers grinding floppy drives to create all kinds of symphonies. Pretty cool... but I prefer the beeps! BTW another nice thing about beep tracks and other stuff is you can hack on them. This is why I live MIDI so much (and why linux pisses me off so much with its absolutely crappy support for it) - you can tweak all kinds of parameters as it plays, modify files, silence tracks, all kinds of cool things that aren't practical with digital audio. They also loop so well, I can set a video game song playing for 30 minutes straight as real life background music and not get annoyed with it. Sometimes that works with mp3s too, but the video game ones are specifically made for infinite looping so there's no discontinuity as it goes around again.
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 03:29:59 +0200
"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:

 On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 19:17:45 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 I dunno, I find that my good memories of those old games are 
 quite tainted by nostalgia.

True in some cases, but in others I find myself able to appreciate them even more now. But I avoid the taint by playing them again every few years :)

I agree. I don't really get when people say that older games are just nostalgia. I mean, I'm sure it is for some people, but I genuinely do like a lot of those other games even when I actually go back and replay them (not *all* of course). Yea, there are occasionally areas where those older games are rough around the edges by today's standards. Ex: The mouse handling in Lemmings 3 is really awkward, and save systems weren't always good in the rare cases they existed at all. But most of these issues are either: A. Obviated by save states or B. Easier to put up with than extremely *inane* non-skippable cutscenes (*cough*Assassin's Creed, Shift 2, and the original non-blood-dragon FarCry 3*cough*), endless company logos, patronizing tutorials, endless chatter, inability to use keyboard/mouse for FPSes on systems with *actual USB ports* (ie every console FPS except CS:GO), bad framerates *despite* being on hardware several orders of magnitude more powerful (16-bit systems ran at 30 fps, there's *no* excuse for bad framerates anymore - I'm looking at you Sonic. If you're having framerate difficulties then quit being such graphics whores and tone down all the effects and poly counts for godssakes, you're not targeting 1991 hardware, you can make things run at least *that* well), and all the other shit from so many modern games. But back to the topic: I admit there are a few "retro" games I've played and enjoyed SOOOO much over the years that I've started to just get tired of (like the NES Marios), but more often than not my reaction isn't disappointment of "Ehh, I remember it being better" but frequently one of these: A. It's been too long since I've played this. It's really nice to get back to games where you have to actually *think* and/or *try*. Man I like this game. B. Hmmm, I wasn't into this at the time, but all of a sudden it all just "clicks" and I "get it" now. Sweet! C. I never played/heard of this at the time, and that's a shame because this is fantastic! (Ex: I'm currently going through a fan translation of Monster World 4 on Genesis.) Of course there *are* plenty of duds on those old systems, but that's true of modern systems, too: Last Of Us[1], anyone? No thanks. God no. However, all that said, there *is* a lot of modern stuff I like, too. Just *some* of them off the top of my head: - Rayman Origins/Legends - Splinter Cell 1-3 (4's not terrible either, haven't played 5 or 6) - 3D Dot Game Heroes - Forza/Gran Turismo/Need for Speed: Shift 1 - Sonic Racing Transformed - Sonic 4/Generations - Limbo - Hatsune Miku: Project Diva F - BioShock (once you get past the completely worthless first ~20-30min) - Portal 1 and 2 - Disgaea - From Dust - Kirby's Epic Yarn - New Mario - Kororinpa - Pikmin - Wii Sports Resort (believe it or not) - Angry Birds in Space (believe it or not) - Adventures of Big and Tiny (or something like that) - Braid So I'm not really a "new games" hater so much as an "idiotic bullcrap" hater. There *are* good games being made; it's just there are also some very irritating trends: For example, a *lot* of the modern AAA games that are actually good, are complete and total shit for the first 30-60 minutes - *then* they become worthwhile. It's as if they're *trying* to make their games leave a bad first impression. Wanna see a *good* first impression? Play "Castlevania: Symphony of the Night". But a lot of AAA devs take what leads to good first impressions and do exactly the opposite. (BTW: No personal offense intended, Manu. I don't know how long you've been there, but I actually love the first two Max Paynes. I honestly do.) [1] Last Of Us <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTsBn36yPrg> Ie "Lets make a game about wandering from one empty, pointless room to the next, to the next, to the next, while seeing how much inane whining you can tolerate from the NPCs, and after every so many rooms of non-gameplay force people to watch parts of a generic zombie movie with the only distinction being a protagonist who's a grown male drama queeen ('What, she's infected and lied to us?! Whine whine whine, bitch bitch bitch.') and then watch the whole industry to praise it as an alleged breakthrough in cinematic gaming" What horseshit. And yes, I've played it, as well as Assassin's Creed 2 which isn't any better. Last Of Us isn't even good as a zombie *movie*. It's more like "If JJ Abrams made a zombie movie". Want a good zombie movie? Try Zombieland or Sean of the Dead. <pet peeve>Zombies are supernaturally reanimated corpses, not viral infections. Supernatural: Cool. Virus: Boring.</pet peeve>
 many annoyances that have been eliminated in modern games.

Oh, modern games have their own annoyances. For example, the NES would flash or glitch. The playstation three freezes up and disconnects its own CPU with its excessive heat.

So *that's* why it crashes more than any other console I've owned! (Although I think another reason for that is that Crackle apparently can't handle the clock being pushed a year ahead to kill Sony's bullshit forced-telemarketing-to-paying-customers. Not that Crackle is really worth using...)
 I'll take the NES though, at least it didn't have such 
 ridiculously long load and boot times!
 

I *LOVE* that about the NES. Here's what an NES game is like: - Purchase game - Open shrinkwrap - Insert cart - Push power - (3rd party only) Wait <= 5 sec for copyright/legal screen(s) - Wait <= 1 sec for title screen - Press Start - (Sometimes) Select save slot, player name - Now playing game!! This is what a typical AAA PS3 game is like: - Push power - Wait for health and safety warning to appear - Wait for warning to go away - Wait for system menu to appear - Purchase game (I'll count this as one step. I think that's fair.) - Download game - Install game (Downloading *isn't* installing? On a *console*?) - Wait for system menu to load list of games...one...by...one... - Start game - Download game update because Sony's infrastructure is too fucking stupid to send you the latest version in the first place. - Wait for PS Eye/Motion health & safety warning even though nobody owns a PS Eye/Motion. - Wait for first company logo to finish animating. - Wait for second company logo to finish animating. - Wait for third company logo to finish animating. - ...etc... - Wait for it to connect to network even though you're already logged into PSN and don't intend to play multiplayer. - Wait for it to explain "Auto Saving" and show you what a "Saving" logo looks like - Wait for it to load the title screen - Wait for the title screen to animate in (Are you *still* interested in playing at this point?) - Press start - A loading screen just to load the main menu - Select an option - Wait for the screen transition animation that some artist decided was necessary - Select another option ...etc... - Wait for game to load - Surprise, it's a cutscene and you can't skip it. - Wait for game to load for real - Another cutscene - Hope to heck *this* loading screen is for the first level - The first level is a tutorial. After several lines of completely unnecessary dialog, some Sergeant is telling me how to push buttons. I can't kill him no matter how much I want to because the last three times I tried the tutorial restarted from the beginning (*cough*Call of Duty 4*cough*). - Spend at least several minutes playing "Simon Says" with Mr. Chatterbox "Can't Get To The Freaking Point" Windbag. (*cough*Much, much more than just Call of Duty*cough*) - Loading cutscene. - Go to the kitchen and make a sandwich while more windbags ramble on about whiny bullshit I don't care about. Occasionally peek my head in to see if they're almost done. Ignore the controller rumbling itself off the edge of the table. - More loading - Bring my snack back to the living room - First level starts, but by now I'm more interested in my food - Finish eating, take control of the now-waiting player character - Walk around a stage that doesn't have much of any gameplay, but maybe has some barely-interactive scripted sequences (with more blathering), or more interspersed cutscenes. - Wait for next level to load - It's now about 30-60 minutes from the first company logo (not from power on) and I finally get to start playing the *real* game. Or not...my laundry's probably done... The bizarre thing is, I swear to god I'm *not* exaggerating any of that. And that means somebody, somewhere, actually thought all that bullshit was acceptable for the price of console + game. Yea, obviously some of it is to be expected (downloading, various purchasing steps, multi-tiered menu system), but most of it's just badly designed, badly engineered bullshit. I've played PUO-heavy DVDs that have far less bullcrap than that.
 
 Gameplay wise.... eh, the new games I like tend to be similar to 
 the old games.
 

Heh, that's often (though not always) my experience, too.
 
 They also loop so well, I can set a video game song playing for 
 30 minutes straight as real life background music and not get 
 annoyed with it.

Well, that depends on the song ;) I can understand why parents got annoyed at us playing those games too long, relegated them to the basement, etc... <g> Journey to Silius had good music. And of course MegaMan and Sonic.
 Sometimes that works with mp3s too, but the 
 video game ones are specifically made for infinite looping so 
 there's no discontinuity as it goes around again.

Yea, that is true.
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 11:04:10 +1000
Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote:

 On 20 September 2013 22:15, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 There is no argument here, actually. The problem is really
 historical -- names like 'du' or 'grep' or 'awk' meant something
 back in who knows when, but they no longer mean anything to us
 today (well, those of us not old enough *cough*). If I were to
 reinvent Unix today, I'd choose better names for these things. But
 think about it, if the above line were instead written like this:

         diskUsage $HOME | sort --reverse --numeric | pager

 it would make so much more sense, wouldn't it? So the "nonsensical"
 part is really just in the poor choice of naming, not an inherent
 weakness of the interface.

I'd still argue that it is. It is how it is, and it's completely prohibitive to casual or new users.

So? Does everything have to be targeted at new/casual users? Can't experienced users have stuff that's made for them? Who ever said command lines are still intended for everybody? Keep in mind, a programmer is NOT a casual or new user. But in any case, please don't mistake "Windows vs Linux" as a "one size fits all" topic, because you seem to be steering things that way. Rant: Seems to be a big trend in computing these days. Everything is all about catering to Average Joe Numbskull and Little Miss Facebook, and to hell anyone who has more advanced experience and needs where "usable by anyone's grandmother" is the least of their concerns. Average Joes need their tools, sure, but so do the rest of us. You do realize that in the time you've spent taking a friendly OS discussion and single-handedly trying[1] to turn it into yet another ill-informed OS flamewar (congratulations, btw) you could have already learned quite a bit about using a unix command line? [1] Don't deny it. Your intent to bait was obvious a few posts back, but due to your good standing here I've been giving you a chance.
 [...]
 I had a video card driver problem the other day. The bundled
 auto-update app failed, and totally broke my computer.
 I had to download kernel source, and run some scripts to compile
 some

 of shim that made the video driver compatible with my kernel to
 get it working again... absolutely astounding.

Uh... you do realize that this is because Linux actually *lets* you fix things? If something like this happened on Windows, the only real solution is to nuke the system from orbit and start from ground zero again (i.e. reinstall). One can hardly expect that repairing a broken car engine should require no thought.

Nothing like that has EVER happened to me in a few decades of windows. In my experience asa linux user, these sort of problems are a daily chore.

I've had stuff like that happen on Windows. Not on my own system within the last few years, but over "a few decades"? Oh hell yea. OTOH, I don't think I've had such trouble with Linux in at least as long. I think 2002 was probably the last time.
 Speaking of which, I managed to totally break my computer last night /
 this morning too.

No shit. Should I be surprised? ;)

 
 but the hardy little thing just kept going. It was
 causing subtle breakages like my printer mysteriously failing to
 work, and when I finally figured out the problem, I downloaded a
 new kernel and recompiled it.

... speechless ;)

 
 I rest my case.
 

Ok, now I know you're just trying to troll. But I've never seen you troll before so you should know better. He made it perfectly clear he had been messing around with his own internals. *Plus* you know perfectly well messing around with Windows internals can also lead to problems requiring expert-skill recovery techniques, so really, you *know* that you know better, so cut the shit. Yes, Linux sucks. And guess what? So does Windows. I use both, by choice. End of story.
 
 I think the main difference is quality-assurance. Windows software is
 more likely to be released only after it's reasonably proven that it
 works.
 

Like Debian. And if you bring up some broken Linux distro, I'll bring up WinME, and then we'll all have added a whole lot of usefulness to the discussion ;)
 I'm not a mechanic, and I shouldn't have to be to drive a car.
 

Strawman, in too many ways to be worth listing.
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 05:05:41 -0400
Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:
 
 You do realize that in the time you've spent taking a friendly OS
 discussion and single-handedly trying[1] to turn it into yet another
 ill-informed OS flamewar (congratulations, btw) you could have already
 learned quite a bit about using a unix command line?
 
 [1] Don't deny it. Your intent to bait was obvious a few posts back,
 but due to your good standing here I've been giving you a chance.
 

That came out overly-harsh and not how I intended. ("Yea, no shit, Nick") Uhh, yea... What I mean is just, in this section of the thread, it has been sounding as if you're simply flame-baiting or arguing for the sake of arguing. (And then I somehow managed to awkwardly weave that into a completely different and not-terribly-important point about "time it takes", bleh, whatever...)
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--001a11c3092011338804e6e624b9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 21 September 2013 19:05, Nick Sabalausky <
SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:

 On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 11:04:10 +1000
 Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote:

 On 20 September 2013 22:15, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 There is no argument here, actually. The problem is really
 historical -- names like 'du' or 'grep' or 'awk' meant something
 back in who knows when, but they no longer mean anything to us
 today (well, those of us not old enough *cough*). If I were to
 reinvent Unix today, I'd choose better names for these things. But
 think about it, if the above line were instead written like this:

         diskUsage $HOME | sort --reverse --numeric | pager

 it would make so much more sense, wouldn't it? So the "nonsensical"
 part is really just in the poor choice of naming, not an inherent
 weakness of the interface.

I'd still argue that it is. It is how it is, and it's completely prohibitive to casual or new users.

So? Does everything have to be targeted at new/casual users? Can't experienced users have stuff that's made for them? Who ever said command lines are still intended for everybody? Keep in mind, a programmer is NOT a casual or new user. But in any case, please don't mistake "Windows vs Linux" as a "one size fits all" topic, because you seem to be steering things that way. Rant: Seems to be a big trend in computing these days. Everything is all about catering to Average Joe Numbskull and Little Miss Facebook, and to hell anyone who has more advanced experience and needs where "usable by anyone's grandmother" is the least of their concerns. Average Joes need their tools, sure, but so do the rest of us. You do realize that in the time you've spent taking a friendly OS discussion and single-handedly trying[1] to turn it into yet another ill-informed OS flamewar (congratulations, btw) you could have already learned quite a bit about using a unix command line? [1] Don't deny it. Your intent to bait was obvious a few posts back, but due to your good standing here I've been giving you a chance.

;) Sure, I do like to stir the pot to some extent, I won't deny that, but my primary position in this thread is actually just a recount of my own experience trying to use linux _productively_. I just reviewed my last few posts, I don't think I was being particularly unreasonable. I'm trying to use linux, right now, and it's frustrating. If it just worked, I wouldn't be frustrated. I've said about 3 times already, and I'll say again, I actually *really* like the idea of linux, I really do wish to see it succeed. I've made deals with myself on numerous occasions to try and force myself to adapt. The problem is, every time I make a good solid effort, I just become frustrated with inevitable problems, and end up wasting so much time. And the end point, even if I were somewhat more expert at fighting the OS, is I'm left with a suite of tools which are simply inferior and less productive by a huge huge margin to what I'm used to. I wish this weren't the case. (I've already acknowledged loads of cool projects that look promising, but isn't that ALWAYS the way with linux? And I'm talking about things that were rock solid over 10 years ago) Philosophically, I hate windows, apple, and everything they stand for. I'd love to be all-out linux. I'm honestly just expressing my frustration with the offering, and that people seem to genuinely think it's okay. I'm not flame baiting (well, maybe a little bit, just because it always gets a good reaction), I don't think my criticisms are unrealistic. And they're not even really baits, I'm just sharing personal experience. I'm also not 'average-joe-numskull', at least I don't like to think I am, but that doesn't mean I want to know how a car is built, and then in turn how each individual part was built, and how to fix it, before I can have confidence it will get me to Sydney in one piece. I don't actually really care about how linux works, or any of the little bits and pieces that form it's awkward foundation... and I shouldn't need to in order to like the premise of an open system, and want to use it on that merit alone. I don't actually enjoy OPERATING a computer, I enjoy the creative process of working, and getting work done. Solving interesting problems. If the computer gets in my way, it has failed me at some level. That might sound strange coming from a software engineer, but I guess that's how I see it. I just don't have the patience to mess with my OS anymore. I enjoyed _operating_ my Amiga 15-20 years ago. You should have seen how pimp my desktop was! I don't like operating computers anymore, I like using them. I likewise don't want to know how the video driver interacts with the kernel, and that I'm supposed to download source code to manually build some driver shim to correct a fault of the system auto-update tool failing to resolve a dependency correctly. Or my re-mapped hotkeys mysteriously reverting to their default settings every few minutes after I map them for no apparent reason (I don't even know where to start looking for that). Or half the software on my PC looking ugly and broken while half of it looks fine (I tracked this down to the theme control panel not properly applying style settings to both gnome and Qt, it managed to leave Qt styling in an invalid state, somehow). I can't count the number of times that linux has crapped out by applying a large update all at once in the last 5 years. I think the daily linux users apply a small number of updates regularly, and it seems to work better that way. But for someone who primarily uses windows, when I switch to linux it wants to install a crap load of updates all at once, and it often goes wrong. I suspect updating versions 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 is the common path, but updating 1 -> 3 -> 4 -> 9 it not so well tested, and often fails. You can try and dismiss this all, and go "yeah well, obviously it's hard for people to find the time to work on this and that and make it as solid as what a commercial company can possible achieve with loads of money, and everyone is disconnected little groups just trying to cooperate and communication is hard and", blah blah, but in *practise*, it doesn't make one bit of difference to me.. it always breaks on me for one reason or another, and wastes my time. And there are few things more frustrating to me than having me time wasted by problems that were otherwise solved decades ago... In a lot of ways, in this thread I'm effectively venting frustration, sorry if you're offended by it. I'm still using linux, right now even, trying to overcome some issues with my opengl rendering driver; versioning problems perhaps, wrangling extensions, trying to understand how the drivers relate to the problems, and where the source of various pieces of the puzzle all stem, if it's reasonable to expect various extensions to be present in conjunction or if I absolutely need to consider every single one of them in isolation. Why is my opengl driver reporting version 3.3? My PC is really modern... and my OpenGL code works on windows. I have fuck-all tools available, it's near impossible to debug. Something that I know would take me 5 minutes in windows with that toolset has taken me a whole day so far... I honestly don't understand how linux users think it's okay. That's not inflammatory, it's legitimate amazement. The only way I can reason that people can be happy being so unproductive, is that they don't actually know what it's like to be really productive in the first place. (see: my comment prior about the mouse scroll-wheel) That might sound insulting, accusing people of being unproductive when I'm sure they feel like they are, and I'm almost certainly wrong, sure, they're probably just adapted to a totally different flow, but I just can't see it, and I have no other working theories. If I had visual studio and PIX, I would take a screen capture, clicked on the bad pixel, it would immediately present a stack of every rendering event contributing to that pixel, and the entire state of the rendering hardware at every step of the way, and I'd find the problem in a couple of minutes. Here, I find myself writing heaps of code just to debug my code! Seriously? </endrant> (disclaimer: you caught me after dinner, and a few wine's down, which may have resulted in a few extra paragraphs ;)
 [...]
 I had a video card driver problem the other day. The bundled
 auto-update app failed, and totally broke my computer.
 I had to download kernel source, and run some scripts to compile
 some

 of shim that made the video driver compatible with my kernel to
 get it working again... absolutely astounding.

Uh... you do realize that this is because Linux actually *lets* you fix things? If something like this happened on Windows, the only real solution is to nuke the system from orbit and start from ground zero again (i.e. reinstall). One can hardly expect that repairing a broken car engine should require no thought.

Nothing like that has EVER happened to me in a few decades of windows. In my experience asa linux user, these sort of problems are a daily chore.

I've had stuff like that happen on Windows. Not on my own system within the last few years, but over "a few decades"? Oh hell yea. OTOH, I don't think I've had such trouble with Linux in at least as long. I think 2002 was probably the last time.

I have a strong suspicion that linux works better if you use it daily. I'm starting to realise a pattern emerging that things tend to fuck up after I perform a bulk round of updates. This tends to happen more often as an in-frequent linux user. Every time I boot it up, it wants to update loads of stuff. I suspect the installation tools handle incremental updates better than when you're skipping over a bunch of intermediate revisions... at least, that's my current working theory. That said, I don't think that excuses the situation. It's broken, and it wastes my time. That's the bottom line. I don't have a PhD in linux, and when it breaks, it's very time consuming for me to fix it.
 Speaking of which, I managed to totally break my computer last night /
 this morning too.

No shit. Should I be surprised? ;)

 but the hardy little thing just kept going. It was
 causing subtle breakages like my printer mysteriously failing to
 work, and when I finally figured out the problem, I downloaded a
 new kernel and recompiled it.

... speechless ;)

 I rest my case.

Ok, now I know you're just trying to troll. But I've never seen you troll before so you should know better.

Those 2 comments are about 30% trolling, and 70% amazement that people think this story is actually okay. There's also an element of sympathy, the idea that he managed to break his computer is not foreign to me; it's expected ;) (even if he did go slightly out of his way to do so) I can very happily say, I have NEVER compiled a windows kernel. Objectively though, I'd like to think that this whole scenario described simply shouldn't have been possible under any normal usage scenario in the first place. There's obviously a whole bunch of fail-safe's that are totally missing for your problem to arise in the first place. This is possibly the core of most of my points in this thread too. I'm going to say again, that I do understand WHY linux is how it is, I also consider it a valiant effort/experiment. I like it in theory, I like it in essence, but it just never manages to deliver in practise. At some point, I have to admit that it's just unacceptable so many years down the line. I don't like the direction MS are taking windows at all. More than ever, I really want to become a full-time linux user and embrace the choice that it offers in many aspects... but first, I just want it to work! And I shouldn't have to work to make it work. He made it perfectly clear he had been messing around with his own
 internals. *Plus* you know perfectly well messing around with Windows
 internals can also lead to problems requiring expert-skill recovery
 techniques, so really, you *know* that you know better, so cut the
 shit.

 Yes, Linux sucks. And guess what? So does Windows. I use both, by
 choice. End of story.

This point. This is the part I object. Again, I'm just recounting my experience/frustrations. If i were flaming/trolling/baiting, I would be trying to say that linux is shit, windows is awesome, you suck for liking linux, blah blah. I'm not. Actually, I'm not happy with windows at all. But it has just one critical advantage, it WORKS (at least, out of the box).
 I think the main difference is quality-assurance. Windows software is
 more likely to be released only after it's reasonably proven that it
 works.

Like Debian.

I've tried to use debian, precisely for this alleged stability. My experience was a whole bunch of software that was simply out of date. Modern software/tools doesn't actually work against the out-dated packages. And the result is even less features than the cutting edge releases. I'm sure it's great if I just want to run a webserver and vi. Sadly I'm a user-facing software developer, and that requires being on the cutting edge of computer technology. Basically, my experience was that if it's not in the debian package repository, even if you do manage to get it to work, it's likely LESS stable than on a cutting-edge distro since it's rarely tested against such outdated libraries. Maybe this isn't the case anymore, but it was last time I gave it a shot. And if you bring up some broken Linux distro, I'll bring up WinME, and
 then we'll all have added a whole lot of usefulness to the discussion ;)

I don't think that's a fair comparison at all, that's like saying there was one broken version of ubuntu 10 years ago, but it's all better now...
 I'm not a mechanic, and I shouldn't have to be to drive a car.

Strawman, in too many ways to be worth listing.

I can't agree. I just want to do my work uninterrupted. If my car breaks down half way to Sydney, I'd better hope to god I have phone reception, because I'll have to start calling mechanics and service people to get me moving again, and let's just hope I wasn't pressed to make some sort of deadline... That's seems like a pretty realistic analogy to me. --001a11c3092011338804e6e624b9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">On 21 September 2013 19:05, Nick Sabalausky <span dir=3D"l= tr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com" target=3D"_b= lank">SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div cla= ss=3D"gmail_extra"> <div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi= n:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204= );border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 11:04:10 +1= 000<br> Manu &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:turkeyman gmail.com">turkeyman gmail.com</a>&gt;= wrote:<br> <div class=3D"im"><br> &gt; On 20 September 2013 22:15, H. S. Teoh &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:hsteoh qu= ickfur.ath.cx">hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; There is no argument here, actually. The problem is really<br> &gt; &gt; historical -- names like &#39;du&#39; or &#39;grep&#39; or &#39;a= wk&#39; meant something<br> &gt; &gt; back in who knows when, but they no longer mean anything to us<br=


. But<br> &gt; &gt; think about it, if the above line were instead written like this:= <br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 diskUsage $HOME | sort --reverse --nu= meric | pager<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; it would make so much more sense, wouldn&#39;t it? So the &quot;n= onsensical&quot;<br> &gt; &gt; part is really just in the poor choice of naming, not an inherent= <br> &gt; &gt; weakness of the interface.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt;<br> </div><div class=3D"im">&gt; I&#39;d still argue that it is. It is how it i= s, and it&#39;s completely<br> &gt; prohibitive to casual or new users.<br> <br> </div>So? Does everything have to be targeted at new/casual users? Can&#39;= t<br> experienced users have stuff that&#39;s made for them? Who ever said<br> command lines are still intended for everybody? Keep in mind, a<br> programmer is NOT a casual or new user. But in any case, please don&#39;t<b= r> mistake &quot;Windows vs Linux&quot; as a &quot;one size fits all&quot; top= ic, because you<br> seem to be steering things that way.<br> <br> Rant: Seems to be a big trend in computing these days. Everything is all<br=


r> by anyone&#39;s grandmother&quot; is the least of their concerns.<br> <br> Average Joes need their tools, sure, but so do the rest of us.<br> <br> You do realize that in the time you&#39;ve spent taking a friendly OS<br> discussion and single-handedly trying[1] to turn it into yet another<br> ill-informed OS flamewar (congratulations, btw) you could have already<br> learned quite a bit about using a unix command line?<br> <br> [1] Don&#39;t deny it. Your intent to bait was obvious a few posts back, bu= t<br> due to your good standing here I&#39;ve been giving you a chance.<br></bloc= kquote><div><br></div><div>;)</div><div>Sure, I do like to stir the pot to = some extent, I won&#39;t deny that, but my primary position in this thread = is actually just a recount of my own experience trying to use linux _produc= tively_.</div> <div>I just reviewed my last few posts, I don&#39;t think I was being parti= cularly unreasonable. I&#39;m trying to use linux, right now, and it&#39;s = frustrating. If it just worked, I wouldn&#39;t be frustrated.</div><div> <br></div><div>I&#39;ve said about 3 times already, and I&#39;ll say again,= I actually *really* like the idea of linux, I really do wish to see it suc= ceed. I&#39;ve made deals with myself on numerous occasions to try and forc= e myself to adapt.</div> <div>The problem is, every time I make a good solid effort, I just become f= rustrated with inevitable problems, and end up wasting so much time. And th= e end point, even if I were somewhat more expert at fighting the OS, is I&#= 39;m left with a suite of tools which are simply inferior and less producti= ve by a huge huge margin to what I&#39;m used to. I wish this weren&#39;t t= he case. (I&#39;ve already acknowledged loads of cool projects that look pr= omising, but isn&#39;t that ALWAYS the way with linux? And I&#39;m talking = about things that were rock solid over 10 years ago)</div> <div>Philosophically, I hate windows, apple, and everything they stand for.= I&#39;d love to be all-out linux. I&#39;m honestly just expressing my frus= tration with the offering, and that people seem to genuinely think it&#39;s= okay.</div> <div>I&#39;m not flame baiting (well, maybe a little bit, just because it a= lways gets a good reaction), I don&#39;t think my criticisms are unrealisti= c. And they&#39;re not even really baits, I&#39;m just sharing personal exp= erience.</div> <div><br></div><div>I&#39;m also not &#39;average-joe-numskull&#39;, at lea= st I don&#39;t like to think I am, but that doesn&#39;t mean I want to know= how a car is built, and then in turn how each individual part was built, a= nd how to fix it, before I can have confidence it will get me to Sydney in = one piece.</div> <div>I don&#39;t actually really care about how linux works, or any of the = little bits and pieces that form it&#39;s awkward foundation... and I shoul= dn&#39;t need to in order to like the premise of an open system, and want t= o use it on that merit alone.</div> <div>I don&#39;t actually enjoy OPERATING a computer, I enjoy the creative = process of working, and getting work done. Solving interesting problems. If= the computer gets in my way, it has failed me at some level.</div><div> That might sound strange coming from a software engineer, but I guess that&= #39;s how I see it. I just don&#39;t have the patience to mess with my OS a= nymore.</div><div>I enjoyed _operating_ my Amiga 15-20 years ago. You shoul= d have seen how pimp my desktop was!</div> <div>I don&#39;t like operating computers anymore, I like using them.</div>= <div><br></div><div>I likewise don&#39;t want to know how the video driver = interacts with the kernel, and that I&#39;m supposed to download source cod= e to manually build some driver shim to correct a fault of the system auto-= update tool failing to resolve a dependency correctly.</div> <div>Or my re-mapped hotkeys mysteriously reverting to their default settin= gs every few minutes after I map them for no apparent reason (I don&#39;t e= ven know where to start looking for that).</div><div>Or half the software o= n my PC looking ugly and broken while half of it looks fine (I tracked this= down to the theme control panel not properly applying style settings to bo= th gnome and Qt, it managed to leave Qt styling in an invalid state, someho= w).</div> <div><br></div><div>I can&#39;t count the number of times that linux has cr= apped out by applying a large update all at once in the last 5 years.</div>= <div>I think the daily linux users apply a small number of updates regularl= y, and it seems to work better that way. But for someone who primarily uses= windows, when I switch to linux it wants to install a crap load of updates= all at once, and it often goes wrong.</div> <div>I suspect updating versions 1 -&gt; 2 -&gt; 3 -&gt; 4 is the common pa= th, but updating 1 -&gt; 3 -&gt; 4 -&gt; 9 it not so well tested, and often= fails.</div><div><br></div><div>You can try and dismiss this all, and go &= quot;yeah well, obviously it&#39;s hard for people to find the time to work= on this and that and make it as solid as what a commercial company can pos= sible achieve with loads of money, and everyone is disconnected little grou= ps just trying to cooperate and communication is hard and&quot;, blah blah,= but in *practise*, it doesn&#39;t make one bit of difference to me.. it al= ways breaks on me for one reason or another, and wastes my time. And there = are few things more frustrating to me than having me time wasted by problem= s that were otherwise solved decades ago...</div> <div><br></div><div>In a lot of ways, in this thread I&#39;m effectively ve= nting frustration, sorry if you&#39;re offended by it.</div><div>I&#39;m st= ill using linux, right now even, trying to overcome some issues with my ope= ngl rendering driver; versioning problems perhaps, wrangling extensions, tr= ying to understand how the drivers relate to the problems, and where the so= urce of various pieces of the puzzle all stem, if it&#39;s reasonable to ex= pect various extensions to be present in conjunction or if I absolutely nee= d to consider every single one of them in isolation.<br> </div><div>Why is my opengl driver reporting version 3.3? My PC is really m= odern... and my OpenGL code works on windows.</div><div>I have fuck-all too= ls available, it&#39;s near impossible to debug. Something that I know woul= d take me 5 minutes in windows with that toolset has taken me a whole day s= o far...<br> </div><div>I honestly don&#39;t understand how linux users think it&#39;s o= kay. That&#39;s not inflammatory, it&#39;s legitimate amazement.</div><div>= The only way I can reason that people can be happy being so unproductive, i= s that they don&#39;t actually know what it&#39;s like to be really product= ive in the first place. (see: my comment prior about the mouse scroll-wheel= )</div> <div>That might sound insulting, accusing people of being unproductive when= I&#39;m sure they feel like they are, and I&#39;m almost certainly wrong, = sure, they&#39;re probably just adapted to a totally different flow, but I = just can&#39;t see it, and I have no other working theories.</div> <div><br></div><div>If I had visual studio and PIX, I would take a screen c= apture, clicked on the bad pixel, it would immediately present a stack of e= very rendering event contributing to that pixel, and the entire state of th= e rendering hardware at every step of the way, and I&#39;d find the problem= in a couple of minutes.</div> <div>Here, I find myself writing heaps of code just to debug my code! Serio= usly?</div><div><br></div><div><div>&lt;/endrant&gt;</div></div><div><br></= div><div>(disclaimer: you caught me after dinner, and a few wine&#39;s down= , which may have resulted in a few extra paragraphs ;)</div> <div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p= x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef= t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im"> &gt; [...]<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; I had a video card driver problem the other day. The bundled= <br> &gt; &gt; &gt; auto-update app failed, and totally broke my computer.<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; I had to download kernel source, and run some scripts to com= pile<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; some<br> &gt; &gt; sort<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; of shim that made the video driver compatible with my kernel= to<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; get it working again... absolutely astounding.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; Uh... you do realize that this is because Linux actually *lets* y= ou<br> &gt; &gt; fix things? If something like this happened on Windows, the only<= br> &gt; &gt; real solution is to nuke the system from orbit and start from<br> &gt; &gt; ground zero again (i.e. reinstall). One can hardly expect that<br=

&gt; &gt;<br> &gt;<br> </div><div class=3D"im">&gt; Nothing like that has EVER happened to me in a= few decades of windows.<br> &gt; In my experience asa linux user, these sort of problems are a daily<br=

&gt;<br> <br> </div>I&#39;ve had stuff like that happen on Windows. Not on my own system = within<br> the last few years, but over &quot;a few decades&quot;? Oh hell yea.<br> <br> OTOH, I don&#39;t think I&#39;ve had such trouble with Linux in at least as= <br> long. I think 2002 was probably the last time.<br></blockquote><div><br></d= iv><div>I have a strong suspicion that linux works better if you use it dai= ly.</div><div>I&#39;m starting to realise a pattern emerging that things te= nd to fuck up after I perform a bulk round of updates.</div> <div>This tends to happen more often as an in-frequent linux user. Every ti= me I boot it up, it wants to update loads of stuff.</div><div>I suspect the= installation tools handle incremental updates better than when you&#39;re = skipping over a bunch of intermediate revisions... at least, that&#39;s my = current working theory.</div> <div>That said, I don&#39;t think that excuses the situation. It&#39;s brok= en, and it wastes my time. That&#39;s the bottom line. I don&#39;t have a P= hD in linux, and when it breaks, it&#39;s very time consuming for me to fix= it.</div> <div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p= x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef= t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im"> &gt; Speaking of which, I managed to totally break my computer last night /= <br> &gt; &gt; this morning too.<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> </div><div class=3D"im">&gt; No shit. Should I be surprised? ;)<br> &gt;<br> </div>[...]<br> <div class=3D"im">&gt;<br> &gt; &gt; but the hardy little thing just kept going. It was<br> &gt; &gt; causing subtle breakages like my printer mysteriously failing to<= br> &gt; &gt; work, and when I finally figured out the problem, I downloaded a<= br> &gt; &gt; new kernel and recompiled it.<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> </div>&gt; ... speechless ;)<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> [...]<br> &gt;<br> &gt; I rest my case.<br> &gt;<br> <br> Ok, now I know you&#39;re just trying to troll. But I&#39;ve never seen you= <br> troll before so you should know better.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div=
Those 2 comments are about 30% trolling, and 70% amazement that people thi=

mpathy, the idea that he managed to break his computer is not foreign to me= ; it&#39;s expected ;) (even if he did go slightly out of his way to do so)= </div> <div><br></div><div>I can very happily say, I have NEVER compiled a windows= kernel.</div><div><br></div><div>Objectively though, I&#39;d like to think= that this whole scenario described simply shouldn&#39;t have been possible= under any normal usage scenario in the first place.</div> <div>There&#39;s obviously a whole bunch of fail-safe&#39;s that are totall= y missing for your problem to arise in the first place.</div><div>This is p= ossibly the core of most of my points in this thread too.</div><div><br> </div><div>I&#39;m going to say again, that I do understand WHY linux is ho= w it is, I also consider it a valiant effort/experiment.</div><div>I like i= t in theory, I like it in essence, but it just never manages to deliver in = practise. At some point, I have to admit that it&#39;s just unacceptable so= many years down the line.</div> <div>I don&#39;t like the direction MS are taking windows at all. More than= ever, I really want to become a full-time linux user and embrace the choic= e that it offers in many aspects... but first, I just want it to work!</div=

<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-= left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p= adding-left:1ex"> He made it perfectly clear he had been messing around with his own<br> internals. *Plus* you know perfectly well messing around with Windows<br> internals can also lead to problems requiring expert-skill recovery<br> techniques, so really, you *know* that you know better, so cut the<br> shit.<br> <br> Yes, Linux sucks. And guess what? So does Windows. I use both, by<br> choice. End of story.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This point. This = is the part I object.</div><div>Again, I&#39;m just recounting my experienc= e/frustrations.<br></div><div>If i were flaming/trolling/baiting, I would b= e trying to say that linux is shit, windows is awesome, you suck for liking= linux, blah blah. I&#39;m not. Actually, I&#39;m not happy with windows at= all. But it has just one critical advantage, it WORKS (at least, out of th= e box).</div> <div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p= x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef= t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im"> &gt;<br> &gt; I think the main difference is quality-assurance. Windows software is<= br> &gt; more likely to be released only after it&#39;s reasonably proven that = it<br> &gt; works.<br> &gt;<br> <br> </div>Like Debian.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I&#39;ve tried to us= e debian, precisely for this alleged stability.</div><div>My experience was= a whole bunch of software that was simply out of date. Modern software/too= ls doesn&#39;t actually work against the out-dated packages. And the result= is even less features than the cutting edge releases.</div> <div>I&#39;m sure it&#39;s great if I just want to run a webserver and vi. = Sadly I&#39;m a user-facing software developer, and that requires being on = the cutting edge of computer technology.</div><div>Basically, my experience= was that if it&#39;s not in the debian package repository, even if you do = manage to get it to work, it&#39;s likely LESS stable than on a cutting-edg= e distro since it&#39;s rarely tested against such outdated libraries.</div=

a shot.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"marg= in:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,20= 4);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"> And if you bring up some broken Linux distro, I&#39;ll bring up WinME, and<= br> then we&#39;ll all have added a whole lot of usefulness to the discussion ;= )<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I don&#39;t think that&#39;s a fair c= omparison at all, that&#39;s like saying there was one broken version of ub= untu 10 years ago, but it&#39;s all better now...</div> <div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p= x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef= t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im"> &gt; I&#39;m not a mechanic, and I shouldn&#39;t have to be to drive a car.= <br> &gt;<br> <br> </div>Strawman, in too many ways to be worth listing.<br></blockquote><div>= <br></div><div>I can&#39;t agree. I just want to do my work uninterrupted.<= /div><div>If my car breaks down half way to Sydney, I&#39;d better hope to = god I have phone reception, because I&#39;ll have to start calling mechanic= s and service people to get me moving again, and let&#39;s just hope I wasn= &#39;t pressed to make some sort of deadline...</div> <div>That&#39;s seems like a pretty realistic analogy to me.</div></div></d= iv></div> --001a11c3092011338804e6e624b9--
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--047d7b5d33d43184fe04e6e674c9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 21 September 2013 21:27, Joseph Rushton Wakeling <
joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> wrote:

 Specifically in this case: the user-friendliness of GNU/Linux distros has
 come a _huge_ way in the last 10 years, but there's no reason why they
 shouldn't be every bit as surface-friendly (maybe even more so) than the
 popular commercial OS's while retaining all the power that experts need and
 want.  It's a terrible shame that more attention is not given to this
 surface-friendliness, and it's striking how resistant many old-school free
 software people are to usability-oriented improvements _that don't
 necessarily constrain them_.

 ** Example 1 **
 I was a longstanding KDE user until with the 12.04 release of Ubuntu, I
 switched over to using Unity.  I found it much more usable and effective in
 all sorts of ways, but initially I was frustrated because there were
 superficially less config options available.  It was striking how quickly I
 realized _I didn't miss them_ and that most of that configurability I'd had
 with KDE was a distraction rather than something that assisted me.  As
 someone wrote round-about that time, there's a tendency for customisability
 to be an excuse for lack of design.

I really like this point. It's something I think I'll definitely keep in mind in the future. I'm certainly guilty of this myself; "surely people would prefer the option" when I'm writing some code. But in reality, in almost every piece of software I use myself, even as a 'power user', I tend to use it in it's default configuration. What this really highlights is that I'm a terrible UX coder myself :P --047d7b5d33d43184fe04e6e674c9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">On 21 September 2013 21:27, Joseph Rushton Wakeling <span = dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:joseph.wakeling webdrake.net" target=3D"_= blank">joseph.wakeling webdrake.net</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"= gmail_extra"> <div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi= n:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im"=
<br></div>

ome a _huge_ way in the last 10 years, but there&#39;s no reason why they s= houldn&#39;t be every bit as surface-friendly (maybe even more so) than the= popular commercial OS&#39;s while retaining all the power that experts nee= d and want. =C2=A0It&#39;s a terrible shame that more attention is not give= n to this surface-friendliness, and it&#39;s striking how resistant many ol= d-school free software people are to usability-oriented improvements _that = don&#39;t necessarily constrain them_.<br> <br> ** Example 1 **<br> I was a longstanding KDE user until with the 12.04 release of Ubuntu, I swi= tched over to using Unity. =C2=A0I found it much more usable and effective = in all sorts of ways, but initially I was frustrated because there were sup= erficially less config options available. =C2=A0It was striking how quickly= I realized _I didn&#39;t miss them_ and that most of that configurability = I&#39;d had with KDE was a distraction rather than something that assisted = me. =C2=A0As someone wrote round-about that time, there&#39;s a tendency fo= r customisability to be an excuse for lack of design.<br> </blockquote><div><br></div><div>I really like this point. It&#39;s somethi= ng I think I&#39;ll definitely keep in mind in the future. I&#39;m certainl= y guilty of this myself; &quot;surely people would prefer the option&quot; = when I&#39;m writing some code.</div> <div>But in reality, in almost every piece of software I use myself, even a= s a &#39;power user&#39;, I tend to use it in it&#39;s default configuratio= n.</div><div><br></div><div>What this really highlights is that I&#39;m a t= errible UX coder myself :P</div> </div></div></div> --047d7b5d33d43184fe04e6e674c9--
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 21 September 2013 at 15:07:17 UTC, Manu wrote:
 I have fuck-all tools available, it's near impossible to debug. 
 Something
 that I know would take me 5 minutes in windows with that 
 toolset has taken
 me a whole day so far...
 I honestly don't understand how linux users think it's okay.

Well, you aren't alone. Valve recently announced that they're working on a Linux debugger. They wouldn't bother wasting time and money doing that if the debugging experience on Linux was any good. As far as I'm aware, they're not working on a debugger for Windows, and I can only assume that's because debugging on Windows is bearable.
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--001a11c2e22467193104e6e700cd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 22 September 2013 01:38, Peter Alexander <peter.alexander.au gmail.com>wrote:

 On Saturday, 21 September 2013 at 15:07:17 UTC, Manu wrote:

 I have fuck-all tools available, it's near impossible to debug. Something
 that I know would take me 5 minutes in windows with that toolset has taken
 me a whole day so far...
 I honestly don't understand how linux users think it's okay.

Well, you aren't alone. Valve recently announced that they're working on a Linux debugger. They wouldn't bother wasting time and money doing that if the debugging experience on Linux was any good. As far as I'm aware, they're not working on a debugger for Windows, and I can only assume that's because debugging on Windows is bearable.

Yeah, there is discussion about this in another thread somewhere else. I'm very much looking forward to what they bring to the table. But like I said before, I fear they've got a LOT of catching up to do... --001a11c2e22467193104e6e700cd Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">On 22 September 2013 01:38, Peter Alexander <span dir=3D"l= tr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:peter.alexander.au gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">p= eter.alexander.au gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_ex= tra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p= x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im">On Saturday, 21 September = 2013 at 15:07:17 UTC, Manu wrote:<br> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p= x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> I have fuck-all tools available, it&#39;s near impossible to debug. Somethi= ng<br> that I know would take me 5 minutes in windows with that toolset has taken<= br> me a whole day so far...<br> I honestly don&#39;t understand how linux users think it&#39;s okay.<br> </blockquote> <br></div> Well, you aren&#39;t alone. Valve recently announced that they&#39;re worki= ng on a Linux debugger. They wouldn&#39;t bother wasting time and money doi= ng that if the debugging experience on Linux was any good. As far as I&#39;= m aware, they&#39;re not working on a debugger for Windows, and I can only = assume that&#39;s because debugging on Windows is bearable.<br> </blockquote></div><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Yeah, there is disc= ussion about this in another thread somewhere else.</div><div class=3D"gmai= l_extra">I&#39;m very much looking forward to what they bring to the table.= But like I said before, I fear they&#39;ve got a LOT of catching up to do.= ..</div> </div> --001a11c2e22467193104e6e700cd--
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 01:07:08 +1000
Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote:

[...lots of stuff snipped...]

Believe it or not, my opinions on Linux, Windows and everyday usability are actually very, very similar to yours (including the vague impression that Linux GUIs are just facades - which they actually sort of are just by design, but I digress). In fact, all that stuff is why I'm still on Windows for my main system. Luckily, things like driver issues and major failures haven't been an issue for me on Linux for quite some time. But it's other everyday-productivity things like finding a filemanager and taskbar that aren't too rough-around-the-edges (because I rely on them *sooo* heavily), Tortoise-like VCS integration (I don't understand how people can use Git's command line for anything non-trivial), non-manual HDD SMART monitoring like HD Sentinel, etc. Finding suitable replacements for all these things I use every day takes some work, and I'm still not entirely finished. And even when I do find what seems to be the best, it isn't always as good as Windows: For example, there is *no* taskbar on Linux I've found that's as well-designed as the one Windows has already had for nearly 20 years. There are a bunch of OSX-dock-alikes that, I assume, might do a good job of emulating the OSX experience (I haven't tried since I never liked the dock). But over a decade since I first tried them, the taskbars in KDE, XFCE, etc still don't quite match the quality of design that MS already had in Windows 95. That said, I do find that Xfce 4.10 is good enough to be acceptable for me, but it still isn't up to Windows standards. The odd thing is, I've been finding that each new version of post-XP Windows has required more and more effort to undo all of their...what I find to be productivity-hindering UI "enhancements". So Windows is requiring more and more effort (for me), and simultaneously I've been getting more and more proficient with the ever-improving Linux (due to my server work and doing cross-platform testing), and I don't see any signs of MS or Linux altering their current trajectories. So the writing's on the wall, as it were, and for me Linux is becoming a better bet for everyday productivity. (But this is all just "FWIW" side comments, not an argument of Linux being "better".) I think it was mainly your reaction to H. S. Teoh's story that irked me. It's kinda like watching a mechanic rebuild the engine of some "known to be gearhead-friendly" car just because he'd been trying to squeeze out some extra horsepower and erroneously saying "Wow, that must be a bad brand of car if you have to muck with the engine just to drive it." Also, I disagree with your implication that a command line actually needs to be more user-friendly in more ways than just less cryptic names. Obviously I wouldn't have a problem if the commandline actually was more usable to everyone (naturally that'd be a good thing), but I don't think that's a significant issue, being that it *is* the command line after all, and non-experts would mostly just stick to GUIs anyway.
 I'm also not 'average-joe-numskull', at least I don't like to think I
 am,

As far as I'm concerned, a programmer is by definition *not* an average-joe-numskull. If you can write one line of code, run it, and properly understand it, you're already waaay more advanced than 90% of computer users.
The only way I can reason that people can be happy being so
unproductive, is that they don't actually know what it's like to be
really productive in the first place. (see: my comment prior about the
mouse scroll-wheel)

I must have missed that mouse scroll-wheel comment and I can't seem to find it. What was it again? FWIW, And I find this somewhat ironic: I find the mouse scroll-wheel to be FAR more usable on Linux than Windows. On linux you just point to what you want to scroll and...scroll it. On windows you have to go out of your way to give the desired control focus (clicking on some innocuous part of it, tabbing to it, whatever) and only *then* will the scrollwheel actually do its job. Then you want to scroll something else? Repeat the process. Imagine if you had to do that to right-click! I actually find that scrolling issue to really get in my way quite frequently when trying to do work on Windows. :( I was able to fix that on XP, but not on 7.
If I had visual studio and PIX, I would take a screen capture, clicked
on the bad pixel, it would immediately present a stack of every
rendering event contributing to that pixel, and the entire state of
the rendering hardware at every step of the way, and I'd find the
problem in a couple of minutes.

Whoa, now that's pretty damn cool. I'd never heard of PIX before.
I have a strong suspicion that linux works better if you use it daily.
I'm starting to realise a pattern emerging that things tend to fuck up
after I perform a bulk round of updates.

I've learned through pain, even in Windows land (heck, so much software is cross platform these days anyway), that software updates are opportunities for things to go wrong (or to force ill-conceived UI changes that hurt my productivity, but that's another matter). Regardless of OS, I've ended up in the habit of avoiding software updates unless I have a real reason to (which is a shame, because I *like* security updates). *Especially* on the server: Sysadmins have a reputation for not updating as much as the programmers would like, but I totally understand it because I run my server the same way: If it's already working, then updating...say...PHP, can only end up breaking five hundred things, and then guess who has to drop everything and fix it? ;)
 I can very happily say, I have NEVER compiled a windows kernel.

I can say the same about Linux kernels. I'm afraid to, and don't ever want to have to, and I've really never needed to. I hear it's easy and, honestly, I'm sure it is. But, ehh, at best it could only be a bore.
I've tried to use debian, precisely for this alleged stability.
My experience was a whole bunch of software that was simply out of
date.

Yea, that *is* the tradeoff they're famous for making. It'd be great if they didn't have to but, meh. That's actually the reason I've just switched to Mint for desktop Linux. Being based on Ubuntu, it lacks Debian's "out-of-date from day one", but it also lacks Ubuntu's FOSS religiousness and their seeming ambivalence towards anything but Unity (An OSX-clone, in my observation - which is great if you like OSX, but, eh). On the server I'm still Debian though, because stability is everything there. Heck my server is still back on Debian 6 just because I haven't wanted to deal with the risk of breakage updating to Deb 7 (which I *do* really need to bite the bullet and just get done, I know that).
 And if you bring up some broken Linux distro, I'll bring up WinME,
 and then we'll all have added a whole lot of usefulness to the
 discussion ;) 

I don't think that's a fair comparison at all, that's like saying there was one broken version of ubuntu 10 years ago, but it's all better now...

IMO, Linux in general was pretty bad 10 years ago. I gave it a genuine try and ran away screaming...
Sep 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 23 September 2013 at 11:52:28 UTC, Bruno Medeiros 
wrote:
 On 21/09/2013 16:07, Manu wrote:
 ...

My feelings exactly. I learned about Linux and studied it when I was in high-school (Windows 98/Me era), and I was quite excited about it. Windows was more shite those days, and I knew Linux was not for the average user, but I thought that once I learned it well enough (shell, network, configuring partitions, automounting, the X server, etc.), it would be worthwhile to use. That wasn't the case unfortunately. There was always new stuff that would come up that you would need to learn how to configure, or need to thinker, or there would be shortcomings in application functionality. After a certain point it was just annoying. It might be "fun" for people who get kicks out of working the innards of a system and being closer to how things work, but on my computer I wanted to either have my leisure time, or get real work done. And spending time configuring stuff (that in Windows just worked out of the box) is not a productive use of one's time in any way, shape or form. True, this was like 10 years ago and Linux distros got better, but so has Windows, and nowdays there is little motivation now for me to try a different OS/desktop-environment.

Ironically, this is exactly the reason I have never succeeded in using the Windows for daily work. Amount of manual configuration and subverting the defaults needed to make it actually usable for my programming flow is outstanding. In the same time on my Linux distro it is mostly `pacman -Sy gnome gnome-extra xorg-server nvidia dlang vim git` and I am ready to work on a fresh install.
Sep 23 2013
prev sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 23 September 2013 at 23:42:39 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
 I have never figured out how to even get it into that state, 
 but it might have been lack of motivation. I had to work under 
 Windows a while last year.

Yeah, one week I simply went into stubborn "I want to make it work" rampage and after finding and installing dozen of 3d-party tweaks/tools (like multiple desktops implementation, SFTP mount, file handle tracker etc) and integrating cygwin into PowerShell it was almost fine. I have spent a week for it and still had no slightest idea if all that 3d party stuff is not actually a malware behind the scene. Also there still does not seem to be a single good Jabber client for Windows (with voice&video support). It is not surprising I have soon abandoned it :)
Sep 24 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 at 17:01:55 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Actually, that gives me an idea. What if, instead of defaulting 
 to character data, the terminal input stream defaults to control
 structures?

hehe those who don't understand Windows are doomed to reinvent it :) :) :)
 the length) per message, which should minimize the overhead of
 defaulting to control mode instead of pure data mode.

I'm actually not sure if overhead is worth worrying about. On the input side, it'd be slow anyway since humans only type so fast, and on the output side if you transfer big updates at once the few bytes for length and type would be quickly irrelevant anyway. Besides, we aren't on 300 baud serial lines!
 I'm not sure what the bash syntax is, but couldn't you just 
 pipe echo to, say, fd 3 (altin?)?

Yes, we'd just have to change the convention. I should patch vim myself! It could probabaly be done with existing programs through named pipes too.
 Cool!

and it occurs to me that gnu screen is, at its core, just a terminal emulator. So... having a little terminal emulation library is useful for a bunch of things - a gnu screen replacement, a customized xterm, and perhaps even my own putty program for Windows. And embedding it in programs as a nice widget to use for some gui programming fun. But wow, these escape sequences are even more annoying. I thought dealing with the input was a hassle, being on the other end is no walk in the park either! However, I've implemented a handful and vim and bash are both kinda running. Some bugs in vim but it is usable.
 Haha, yeah. If I were doing it, I'd say just do .ttf output 
 from the get-go, render it as an image, whatever, just don't 
 even bother with the antiquated X11 font handling.

I thought about that, but I actually *like* the plain core font "fixed". (rxvt's default, at least on my system) I use it in a number of places and think it looks pretty good. To the extent that I have two xterm shortcuts: one uses bitstream vera mono and the other uses plain old fixed-14. Oh well, I'm rendering each character individually anyway, so switching won't be a problem.
 Then when it comes time to add inline images, just treat it as 
 a very large character with a custom bitmap font. :-P

indeed. Which brings up an idea too: you could just define custom bitmapped glyphs... arguably at this point you might as well just use xlib, but hey doing a printf("\033 magic bitmap stuff") is kinda enticing!
Sep 17 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Michael" <pr m1xa.com> writes:
 Besides, we aren't on 300 baud serial lines!

As backup line I have 56k dial-up modem ;) We still trolling each other about IDE ?) Or Win 8.1 UI is the best UI?
Sep 17 2013
next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 04:05:19PM +0200, JN wrote:
 On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 12:16:39 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Uh... you do realize that this is because Linux actually *lets* you
fix things? If something like this happened on Windows, the only real
solution is to nuke the system from orbit and start from ground zero
again (i.e. reinstall). One can hardly expect that repairing a broken
car engine should require no thought.

When was the last time you used Windows? Since Vista,

I haven't touched Windows since 98, so my experience is probably biased. :)
 if a graphics driver crashes, I usually get a black screen for few
 seconds, then a nice window

Stop right there. When the graphics driver crashes, no window can be displayed...
 saying "The GPU driver has crashed, windows has restarted it". If it
 really breaks, it's a matter of going into Safe Mode and installing
 the driver again. But overall, Windows is almost uncrashable as long
 as you don't have a defective device.

Windows is also unusable without a graphics mode to begin with.
 On Linux? hah, bad driver will lock you out of the system,

Ever heard of single-user mode? It's the same thing as "Safe Mode" (a funny name, makes me think the system is normally unsafe), except that it actually works when your graphics card doesn't work *at all*. Windows' reliance on GUIs makes it almost impossible to fix when something is wrong with the graphics adapter.
 installations regularly break. Closing the system? Oh let me just
 flash random gibberish that looks like memory corruption, then some
 log messages where it's "FATAL ERROR" every third line. No thanks, I
 prefer my stable system.

Never seen these problems before in the 15+ years I've been using Linux. You must have been using a defective distro. ;-) OTOH, I *rather* know about these so-called "fatal errors" (and fix them!) than to live in utopic ignorance of the fact that something might be wrong, all the while thinking that I'm using a "stable" system... Maybe most people like to hide from problems and sweep them under the carpet, but I prefer to be informed, even if it looks ugly on the screen. But hey, each to his own. T -- The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the world. -- Anonymous
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 14:34:26 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Stop right there. When the graphics driver crashes, no window 
 can be displayed...

It restarts the driver or loads a simple, generic driver to work temporarily if that's impossible.
 Windows is also unusable without a graphics mode to begin with.

Not necessarily true, the newer professional/server versions can work without a gui or headless, and any version can run with a minimal graphics mode (such as with a generic VESA driver - safe mode) or even command line off a recovery disk.
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 01:03:39AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 BTW does the email address in your from header work? I just sent you
 a message.

Yes I got it. Just haven't been able to do anything about it yet -- the ship's on fire again, proverbially speaking, at work. (No surprise, it's a large and complex system written in C with smatterings of C++, which has passed through dozens of hands. I leave the current state of the code to your imagination.) T -- "You are a very disagreeable person." "NO."
Sep 27 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 01:48:31 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Have you ever tried to configure sloppy focus on Windows?

yup. It kinda works until you get the idiot apps that raise themselves whenever they get focus! Which are a lot of them. Ugh.
 <rant about inability to do this in Windows deleted/> ;-)

I think you can with add ons...
 Heh. I just use 'bg', 'jobs', and 'fg' on a single terminal. :)

Yeah, I do that sometimes too, but you can get output mixed together! And you can't easily watch for updates without that. So I like to use windows and gnu screen. The windows actually come and go, as I just reattach a running screen session when needed. I also really like the taskbar as a way to see everything (not iconfied in this workspace) at once. Blackbox doesn't have one by default, which is actually why I played with KDE at first for a while, but I got sick of that so I wrote my own. Nothing fancy (I'm tempted to port it to D though and add a few little features), but gives me at-a-glance updates and an easy way to find certain tasks. My custom taskbar also disappears on workspaces 6, 7, and 8, which I use to display full-screen rdesktop and VM instances. By spinning my mouse wheel on the edge of the screen, I can pretend to be on various Windows boxes too! I always have at least one xterm open with a screen session: 0 = where I run mplayer and other media players for background sound. 1 = mutt. 2 = alsamixer. 3 = elvis on a note-to-self file. Then there's three gaim windows: the buddy list, the #d chatroom, and a chat with myself (Where I dump extra notes, and if someone else IMs me, it goes in that window instead of popping up a new one so much better.) And usually gimp for looking at work mockups. And everything else is random projects in rxvts or xterms (depending on if I need unicode or not - my rxvt doesn't support utf8). They are generally screen for bigger, longer running things, 0 = vim with all relevant source files open, screen 1 maybe make or debugger or ssh session, depending on the job. I currently have 28 copies of rxvt and/or xterm open, just stuff I'll get back to eventually. I actually used to run a second copy of X as well, on vt8, for full screen games, but I haven't played full screen games for a long time. I'd do a separate copy so it wouldn't mess up my other windows when changing the resolution or crashing. Switching between the rxvts is easy btw: I can click them on the mousebar, wheel to a new workspace, or I have a bunch of keyboard shortcuts set up, all using the Windows key. Then at times I run nested screens, especially on the laptop. Anyway though I love it because I can have so many more things open than I could ever handle on other systems.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Peter Williams <pwil3058 bigpond.net.au> writes:
On 16/09/13 11:47, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:32:48PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 16:50:50 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
 After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other desktop
 manager comfortably.

This is actually feel about my custom setup based on the Blackbox window manager. It has a lot of little differences from the other common options: 1) sloppy focus. omg it is so much better than click to focus

Back when I was still using a GUI, sloppy focus was one of the only things that made it tolerable to use.

I kind of agree but I use "focus follows mouse" rather than sloppy. I could never understand why most windows managers make "click to change focus" the default as clicking inevitably raises the newly focussed window to the top as well as changing the focus. This greatly reduces flexibility when managing overlapping windows. Peter PS One of the reasons that I dumped Gnome 3 for Cinnamon is that the Gnome people seem determined to remove all user configuration options (in the pursuit of an homogenous desktop) and I figured that it was only a matter of time before they removed the ability to choose what type of focus control one wanted. They'd already removed the ability to configure some things that I always changed from the default.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 04:04:24AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 01:48:31 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Have you ever tried to configure sloppy focus on Windows?

yup. It kinda works until you get the idiot apps that raise themselves whenever they get focus! Which are a lot of them. Ugh.

Exactly. A major annoyance when you're trying to type something while looking at something else in another window for reference. [...]
Heh. I just use 'bg', 'jobs', and 'fg' on a single terminal. :)

Yeah, I do that sometimes too, but you can get output mixed together! And you can't easily watch for updates without that. So I like to use windows and gnu screen. The windows actually come and go, as I just reattach a running screen session when needed.

GNU screen is pretty awesome. But it has some warts that makes me not use it by default: - Its default escape sequence is extremely annoying (ctrl-A clashes with bash's go-to-beginning-of-line, which I use literally *all* the time). Switching it to something like ctrl-U makes it more tolerable. - It doesn't seem to pick up terminal settings correctly sometimes. Which results in needing to set $TERM manually, or type `TERM=rxvt-unicode program args`, instead of just `program args`. Quite annoying. [...]
 I always have at least one xterm open with a screen session: 0 =
 where I run mplayer and other media players for background sound. 1
 = mutt. 2 = alsamixer. 3 = elvis on a note-to-self file.

Heh, my ratpoison setup is pretty similar to your screen setup (ratpoison is essentially X11 windows inside GNU screen) : 0 = main rxvt (terminal for generic stuff, like poking around $HOME, reading manpages, editing TODO lists, etc.), 1 = browser, 2,3,... = other dedicated stuff, depending on what I'm working on. Currently I have 2 = media players, 3 = D-related stuff (mostly for browsing Phobos when I need to look up something, or pulling git HEAD for dmd/druntime/phobos when I'm feeling bored). Within each rxvt, I usually have vim opened to whatever I'm working on. I don't actually have multiple suspended jobs except when I'm working on something intensive, like working on a Phobos pull while editing /tmp/test.d for testing various implementation details, sometimes with `objdump -D | less` viewing the disassembly of some problematic code, or a manpage I'm referencing. [...]
 And everything else is random projects in rxvts or xterms (depending
 on if I need unicode or not - my rxvt doesn't support utf8). They
 are generally screen for bigger, longer running things, 0 = vim with
 all relevant source files open, screen 1 maybe make or debugger or
 ssh session, depending on the job.
 
 I currently have 28 copies of rxvt and/or xterm open, just stuff
 I'll get back to eventually.

Whoa, that's a lot. I usually have only 3-4 things open at a time, sometimes more (at work usually 6-7), but ratpoison is annoying in that having more than 9 things open causes slow switching 'cos you can't just do ctrl-T <digit>. It slows me down enough to lose the advantage of fast keyboard-driven switching, so I avoid it.
 I actually used to run a second copy of X as well, on vt8, for full
 screen games, but I haven't played full screen games for a long
 time. I'd do a separate copy so it wouldn't mess up my other windows
 when changing the resolution or crashing.

Heh. I used to have *three* X servers running, keyed to vt7, vt8, vt9, for 3 simultaneous login sessions, multiplexed by xdm. I still use xdm for X sessions, but nowadays I only have one instance of X running -- it's sorta a historical accident, xdm at some point in the past somehow stopped working properly with multiple local X servers (either that, or the X server didn't like other copies of itself running on the same machine), and I gave up trying to make them coexist peacefully, so I adapted my usage pattern to fit in a single session instead. (Why multiple sessions, you ask? 'cos at one point I was experimenting with different WM setups to see which one(s) I like better, but I still wanted to continue working on whatever it is I was working on without interruption, so having multiple copies of X running allowed me to keep one long-running session for the continuing work, and other sessions that come and go as I play around with stuff. It also made it less prone to X11 upgrade problems -- there was a time when every other X server upgrade carried a risk of outright breaking into little pieces, but I like to live on the bleeding edge so I always upgrade everything. Having multiple sessions open means I can continue doing stuff with the long-running session while trying to fix the broken X server instead of getting interrupted and dropping back to the Linux consoles.)
 Switching between the rxvts is easy btw: I can click them on the
 mousebar, wheel to a new workspace, or I have a bunch of keyboard
 shortcuts set up, all using the Windows key. Then at times I run
 nested screens, especially on the laptop.

In ratpoison, it's just `ctrl-T <digit>` to switch between them. TBH, I'm still not quite happy with the choice of escape sequence. If I had my way, I'd rather have <windowsKey> <F1..F12> instead. Maybe one of these days I'll write a D replacement for ratpoison that does just that. (Ratpoison does let you configure the escape key, but it doesn't work with <windowsKey> for some stupid reason).
 Anyway though I love it because I can have so many more things open
 than I could ever handle on other systems.

Yeah, people can rant and rave about how Linux sux and what-not, but the fact of the matter is, I could run 3 copies of X11, each with 15 windows open on a Pentium with 128MB RAM, and be fully functional, whereas it takes every last drop of juice the system's got just for Windows'98 to run without taking 3 seconds to paint the screen pixel-by-pixel every time you open/close a window. Of course, this is an unfair comparison, because those 3 copies of X11 are running twm, which, besides ratpoison, is as minimal as you can get, whereas Windows'98 is running some resource hungry graphics-intensive GUI. But the point is that the system lets you use a minimal WM should you choose to, rather than in Windows where you *have* to use whatever MS has decided everyone must use, and it's too-bad-so-sad if you need to upgrade your hardware just to be able to continue using it. T -- MSDOS = MicroSoft's Denial Of Service
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 12:09:15 +1000
Peter Williams <pwil3058 bigpond.net.au> wrote:

 On 16/09/13 11:47, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:32:48PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 16:50:50 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
 After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other desktop
 manager comfortably.

This is actually feel about my custom setup based on the Blackbox window manager. It has a lot of little differences from the other common options: 1) sloppy focus. omg it is so much better than click to focus

Back when I was still using a GUI, sloppy focus was one of the only things that made it tolerable to use.

I kind of agree but I use "focus follows mouse" rather than sloppy. I could never understand why most windows managers make "click to change focus" the default as clicking inevitably raises the newly focussed window to the top as well as changing the focus. This greatly reduces flexibility when managing overlapping windows.

While I'm happy with click-to-focus[1] due to my many years with windows, I still have to say "click before the scroll wheel will actually work" is one of the biggest, most ridiculous GUI design blunders out there. It's exactly like requiring the user to click a control before right-click/middle-click/ctrl-click will work. I think I've mentioned this in other threads, but on XP I used KatMouse[2] to fix that, and it was a HUGE usability improvement. Unfortunately, on Win7 it only works a small fraction of the time. And that's unlikely to change because it's closed source abandonware, just like all-too-many freeware apps on windows. (Honestly, I never understood the windows developer culture of producing closed-source freeware.) [1] As long as the click-to-focus isn't "click a button in a different window and then click the same button *again* to make the button actually *receive* the 'clicked' event." [2] KatMouse: http://ehiti.de/katmouse/
 PS One of the reasons that I dumped Gnome 3 for Cinnamon is that the 
 Gnome people seem determined to remove all user configuration options 
 (in the pursuit of an homogenous desktop)

That's the main thing that's kept me away from GNOME 3. If I want people stealing my ability to make my own choices and let them unilaterally decide what I want on my behalf, then there's already plenty of propriety Oses, both desktop and mobile, that are happy to do that for me. (Oh, shit, but now I need to find a self-appointed vicar to make *that* choice for me...)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "PauloPinto" <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 03:48:58 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 04:04:24AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 [...]. But the point is that

lets you use a minimal WM should you choose to, rather than in Windows where you *have* to use whatever MS has decided everyone must use, and it's too-bad-so-sad if you need to upgrade your hardware just to be able to continue using it. T

This is not true. Windows supported alternative window managers since the begging. There were a few alternative ones like LiteSTEP and Stardock, just that mainstream users hardly feel the need to change the window manager. This is not specific of Microsoft, all proper GUI based OS work this way, only UNIX does not, because X was an afterthought anyway. -- Paulo
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--047d7ba975cc7fc2bd04e67b5ad0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 16, 2013 4:50 AM, "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 04:04:24AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 01:48:31 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Have you ever tried to configure sloppy focus on Windows?

yup. It kinda works until you get the idiot apps that raise themselves whenever they get focus! Which are a lot of them. Ugh.

Exactly. A major annoyance when you're trying to type something while looking at something else in another window for reference. [...]
Heh. I just use 'bg', 'jobs', and 'fg' on a single terminal. :)

Yeah, I do that sometimes too, but you can get output mixed together! And you can't easily watch for updates without that. So I like to use windows and gnu screen. The windows actually come and go, as I just reattach a running screen session when needed.

GNU screen is pretty awesome. But it has some warts that makes me not use it by default: - Its default escape sequence is extremely annoying (ctrl-A clashes with bash's go-to-beginning-of-line, which I use literally *all* the time). Switching it to something like ctrl-U makes it more tolerable. - It doesn't seem to pick up terminal settings correctly sometimes. Which results in needing to set $TERM manually, or type `TERM=rxvt-unicode program args`, instead of just `program args`. Quite annoying.

Someone did suggest an alternative to GNU screen that is being actively developed on (GNU Screen is kinda regarded as unmaintainable) but I forget the name of it. Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --047d7ba975cc7fc2bd04e67b5ad0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 16, 2013 4:50 AM, &quot;H. S. Teoh&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:hsteo= h quickfur.ath.cx">hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 04:04:24AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 01:48:31 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:<b= r> &gt; &gt; &gt;Have you ever tried to configure sloppy focus on Windows?<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; yup. It kinda works until you get the idiot apps that raise<br> &gt; &gt; themselves whenever they get focus! Which are a lot of them. Ugh.= <br> &gt;<br> &gt; Exactly. A major annoyance when you&#39;re trying to type something wh= ile<br> &gt; looking at something else in another window for reference.<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; [...]<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;Heh. I just use &#39;bg&#39;, &#39;jobs&#39;, and &#39;fg&#39= ; on a single terminal. :)<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; Yeah, I do that sometimes too, but you can get output mixed<br> &gt; &gt; together! And you can&#39;t easily watch for updates without that= . So I<br> &gt; &gt; like to use windows and gnu screen. The windows actually come and= <br> &gt; &gt; go, as I just reattach a running screen session when needed.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; GNU screen is pretty awesome. But it has some warts that makes me not<= br> &gt; use it by default:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; - Its default escape sequence is extremely annoying (ctrl-A clashes wi= th<br> &gt; =A0 bash&#39;s go-to-beginning-of-line, which I use literally *all* th= e time).<br> &gt; =A0 Switching it to something like ctrl-U makes it more tolerable.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; - It doesn&#39;t seem to pick up terminal settings correctly sometimes= .<br> &gt; =A0 Which results in needing to set $TERM manually, or type<br> &gt; =A0 `TERM=3Drxvt-unicode program args`, instead of just `program args`= .<br> &gt; =A0 Quite annoying.<br> &gt;<br> &gt;</p> <p>Someone did suggest an alternative to GNU screen that is being actively = developed on (GNU Screen is kinda regarded as unmaintainable) but I forget = the name of it.<br></p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;<br> </p> --047d7ba975cc7fc2bd04e67b5ad0--
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 07:43:15 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 Someone did suggest an alternative to GNU screen that is being 
 actively
 developed on (GNU Screen is kinda regarded as unmaintainable) 
 but I forget
 the name of it.

 Regards

tmux?
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 16 September 2013 08:58, Dicebot <public dicebot.lv> wrote:
 On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 07:43:15 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 Someone did suggest an alternative to GNU screen that is being actively
 developed on (GNU Screen is kinda regarded as unmaintainable) but I forget
 the name of it.

 Regards

tmux?

That sounds about right, -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 08:43:00AM +0100, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 On Sep 16, 2013 4:50 AM, "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 GNU screen is pretty awesome. But it has some warts that makes me
 not use it by default:

 - Its default escape sequence is extremely annoying (ctrl-A clashes
   with bash's go-to-beginning-of-line, which I use literally *all*
   the time).  Switching it to something like ctrl-U makes it more
   tolerable.

 - It doesn't seem to pick up terminal settings correctly sometimes.
   Which results in needing to set $TERM manually, or type
   `TERM=rxvt-unicode program args`, instead of just `program args`.
   Quite annoying.

Someone did suggest an alternative to GNU screen that is being actively developed on (GNU Screen is kinda regarded as unmaintainable) but I forget the name of it.

Hmm. Now I'm tempted to write a GNU screen clone in D. Could be the next killer D app. ;-) T -- There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.
Sep 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:24:18AM -0400, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 08:47:32PM -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 - Its default escape sequence is extremely annoying (ctrl-A clashes
   with bash's go-to-beginning-of-line, which I use literally *all*
   the time).  Switching it to something like ctrl-U makes it more
   tolerable.

I never really got into using C-a for start of line. I just use the home key. (I prefer the arrows to hjkl too!)

I used to prefer those too. But I eventually found that it slows me down because I have to constantly move my right hand over to the keypad and back. With C-a and C-e for home/end, I never have to lift my hands off the keyboard. It's a miniscule time savings, but it does add up when you're editing a complex command-line pipeline.
 - It doesn't seem to pick up terminal settings correctly sometimes.
   Which results in needing to set $TERM manually, or type
   `TERM=rxvt-unicode program args`, instead of just `program args`.
   Quite annoying.

Yeah, I've had trouble with this too and got around it by messing with .rc files. My .vimrc if $TERM=='screen' set ttymouse=xterm endif for example. (There's more $TERM hacks in there too.) I also changed the escape when puttying in to C-s. The main reason is the laptop's keyboard is laid out differently, so the same finger position for C-a on the desktop hits s on the laptop.

Eek. I use C-s frequently for throttling program output; it would suck to have to escape it! But yeah, the fact that it's configurable is pretty nice. I have my remote screen keyed to C-u, and local screen left as C-a (though ostensibly I should change that since it clashes with C-a as home), and it's nice to be able to suspend exactly the right screen when they are nested inside each other. On that note, some pretty strange things can happen when you're inside nested screens on the same host, and you try to screen -D between them. :-P
 But a second nice benefit is I can nest screens: use the C-s to switch
 top level ones and then screen -d -r my project screens, and C-a them.
 Pretty boss.

Yep.
 My putty shortcut on the laptop also runs screen -S -something laptop,
 thus creating a screen if needed and reattaching if it is already
 present.

Hmm, maybe I should start doing that. It would greatly lessen the annoyance of working remotely from a flaky wifi connection that disconnects every 5 mins for no good reason. Screen is one of those things that make ssh sessions even usable on such connections, since otherwise the constant disconnection makes it pretty much unusable.
 So whenever I open that putty window, it goes right back to where I
 was... and of course, screen -r laptop works on the desktop too if I
 forget to handle something.
 
 Really convenient, and works across network disconnects. I love it.

Yeah, it makes it actually possible to get things done over those flaky wifi connections in hole-in-a-hole cafs. Otherwise you're spending 90% of the time reconnecting and getting back to where you were, instead of actually getting stuff done.
 Whoa, that's a lot. I usually have only 3-4 things open at a time,

The thing with me is I kinda hate closing things. If I leave it open, then when I finally get around to looking at it again, I can kinda pick up where I left off. Otherwise, I'll forget it even exists!

True dat. I really need to get cracking on writing my D replacement for ratpoison... ratpoison is nice and everything but it does have annoying limitations and bugs. One of the most annoying things about it is its inability to handle UTF-8 (in this day and age! seriously!). The other is the inability to handle raw keysyms (see below). [...]
 Heh. I used to have *three* X servers running, keyed to vt7, vt8,
 vt9, for 3 simultaneous login sessions, multiplexed by xdm. I still
 use xdm

oh man i haven't used xdm for a while. I used to have a cool diskless terminal setup in my house. Old pentium 1 computers whose hard drives died repurposed into netbooting from my linux box.

Nice! Hmm maybe I should start doing that. My last hardware upgrade was done a bit too hastily... and I ended up with an unsupported 3D integrated card on the mobo that doesn't work with the Linux ATI drivers (well, it works, but no 3D accel, which sucks). Worse yet, my previous mobo had a *supported* ATI card, but it was AGP and the new mobo is PCIe (a little detail I overlooked while researching the parts to upgrade). So maybe I can reconnect the monitor/keyboard to the old mobo and have it serve as an X terminal, and have the new mobo serving as a headless compute server, then I can have the best of both worlds!
 (BTW there was a place where getting xorg.conf right was a pain! Not
 to mention other nfs and kernel stuff. I saw more kernel panics while
 setting that up than I saw blue screens of death in the time I used
 windows 95.)

Really? I never had a kernel panic from misconfigured X11. But the X server itself *did* crash in horrible ways... in the old days before KVM, it would segfault and drop me back in the Linux console, but with the graphics card stuck in graphics mode and no way of switching it back ('cos the kernel didn't know how to do the mode switch). Pretty annoying, since the kernel (and every else) actually still works, and I can ssh into it, etc., but it's unusable from the desk and requires a hard reboot to fix.
 But then I could just hit the button in the other rooms and get a nice
 X login screen presented, and my same blackbox based desktop a few
 seconds later. I liked it.

Nice! Makes me wanna collect used PCs from various people to reservice as X terminals. That would be really nice.
 But with my last desktop hardware failure - a bad power supply killed
 the motherboard - I decided to finally dive into a 64 bit kernel and
 with that came updated distro that killed the whole diskless setup.
 
 Maybe some day I'll redo it, but I don't really remember how it worked
 and don't want to spend days figuring it out again. I'll just stick to
 my Windows laptop :<

Well, nowadays X.org is pretty good about autodetecting most settings, so you rarely need a config file anymore. Dunno about diskless X11, though, that might be a bit trickier.
 (Why multiple sessions, you ask? 'cos at one point I was
 experimenting with different WM setups to see which one(s) I like
 better, but I still wanted to continue working on whatever it is I
 was working on without interruption, so having multiple copies of X
 running allowed me to keep

xnest is pretty cool too for playing with window managers.
 getting interrupted and dropping back to the Linux consoles.)

Linux consoles rock so much btw. I really enjoy the time I spend on them - when the above mentioned motherboard died, I went back to my old computer for a while and since I was accustomed to Linux by that point, I passed on the Win98.

I *would* just use the Linux console -- it's lightweight, stable, and pretty efficient unlike X11, but it doesn't support unicode fonts. That's a showstopper for me.
 But, that computer was too slow to run the bloated X11. So I just used
 linux consoles. And it was *awesome*.
 
 1) I had most the same programs I use all the time anyway, but now
 they were prettier! I really like the way vga text mode looks. 80x25
 is a bit small, but it is workable and really beautiful.

Heh. My current rxvt is configured with very large fonts in full-screen so that the resolution is 105*42. If I could, I'd make that 80*whatever. I'm pretty comfortable working with 80 columns, though 25 lines *is* rather cramped once you start using split panes in vim.
 2) I used some text mode replacements for other graphics programs,
 like naim instead of gaim. Worked pretty well, though I didn't stick
 to it once I fixed my newer computer.  (Did however write my own p2p
 messenger that was beautiful and didn't have AOLs servers to depend
 on. Sadly, I lost it though, the people I chatted with refused to use
 it :( Now one of them wants to get on custom stuff again, thanks NSA,
 but I can't find that code. Meh, eventually I'll just rewrite it in D
 anyway. (The original was written in C.))

Hooray for rewriting old lost projects in D. :) You'd probably get it back up and running faster anyway, thanks to D's awesome features.
 3) Less idiocy with incompatible terminals. TERM=linux believe it or
 not, just works, everywhere I tried it.

Really? It never used to work when I was logging remotely from Solaris. But nowadays, I don't know if anyone even uses Solaris anymore, so I guess it's moot. TERM=xterm tends to work a lot better, actually (even in rxvt, which is AFAICT a backwards-compatible extension of xterm).
 I'm tempted to go back to that for a while, but I probably can't avoid
 needing to open something in gimp or firefox for a couple weeks
 straight anymore.

What I'd *really* like, is to extend the Linux console to handle inline graphics (rounded to the next largest multiple of the character tile size). Well, it sorta already supports that (e.g., bootup logo), but it just needs support in the shell and ELinks. Then I'd dump X11 altogether and just use the console. :) It would save so much memory for other stuff, esp. at my old work PC which is starting to show signs of being unable to keep up with the latest bloat everybody and his neighbour's dog is adding to the browser.
 TBH, I'm still not quite happy with the choice of escape sequence.
 If I had my way, I'd rather have <windowsKey> <F1..F12> instead.
 Maybe one of these days I'll write a D replacement for ratpoison
 that does just that.

Probably not too hard to just hack the source.

Yeah, but it's written in (rather ugly) C, and has other design limitations as well. If I were to do anything about it, I'd rather just rewrite it in D.
 (Ratpoison does let you configure the escape key, but it doesn't
 work with <windowsKey> for some stupid reason).

xev tells me the Windows key's keysyms are keycode 133 (keysym 0xffeb, Super_L) keycode 134 (keysym 0xffec, Super_R) The bbkeys program I uses calls it Mod4 in its config file. Maybe one of those names will help?

No, it's a fundamental design flaw in ratpoison that it can only use non-modifier keys for the escape key (why such a lame choice, is beyond my ability to fathom). I'd probably end up rewriting a lot of code just to make it work. Which, if I'm going to do it at all, I rather rewrite in D instead.
 Yeah, people can rant and rave about how Linux sux and what-not, but
 the fact of the matter is, I could run 3 copies of X11, each with 15
 windows open on a Pentium with 128MB RAM, and be fully functional,
 whereas it takes every last drop of juice the system's got just for
 Windows'98 to

It's not even the memory that is good for me: it is the more efficient layouts. The Windows taskbar gets unusable with more than about 10 windows (especially on XP+, where it hides entries or combines them. Ugh, the point of the taskbar is that everything is visible at once!)

I never liked the taskbar. I think it's a wrong design choice. Ratpoison had it right -- C-w and it shows a popup at the top right corner of the screen containing a *vertical* list of windows with full names. Trying to cram everything into a *horizontal* bar just doesn't scale beyond 10 items or so. At least a vertical list, given a small enough font, can support at least 25 items, probably more like 40, before a scrollbar is even needed.
 lets you use a minimal WM should you choose to, rather than in
 Windows where you *have* to use whatever MS has decided everyone
 must use, and

you can do that in Windows too, actually, though of course it is rare to see in practice.

OK, I learned something new today. :) Haven't used Windows in any significant way for the last almost 20 years, so I admit to being a bit out of touch with the current state of things. :-P T -- I am a consultant. My job is to make your job redundant. -- Mr Tom
Sep 16 2013
parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 04:49:34PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Wednesday, 18 September 2013 at 20:33:10 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
And even though we aren't on 300 baud serial lines, sometimes I
*do* wanna transfer large amounts of text into a terminal as fast
as I can, for example:

actually, I do want some way to transfer files easily. Using scp and so on is kinda a pain, I would like to just cat file > REMOTE_COMPUTER and be done with it.

Actually, didn't the old (X,Y,Z)MODEM protocols support this? You'd run a ZMODEM utility on the remote end, then switch your local ZMODEM client to receive mode, and they'd sync and transfer the file transparently. I'm pretty sure this should be possible over the SSH protocol as well, it just needs client-side support.
 scp is ok if you have keys set up on both sides and they are unix, but
 when you're on putty and just want to dump a file over to the Windows
 side, what I'd love is to hit a command and then get a save as prompt
 on the receiving end. Or, better yet, run a program right on it too.

Hmm. Maybe the way to do it is to have ssh forward some fixed port number, say 20001 or some such, then have the local ssh client listen to this port for incoming connections. On the remote end, write a client that connects to this port, does handshake and transfers (or receive) the file. The local ssh client would then trigger whatever local Windows function it is to handle downloads. Then on the remote end you'd do: ssh-send myfile and it connects to port 20001, then the local ssh client picks up the connection, receives the file, and opens the dialogue to prompt what to do with it. Sending would work the same way: say we forward port 20001 in both directions, then to send a file, you'd run ssh-recv on the remote end, which listens to the *remote* port 20001, then the local client can connect to it and transfer the file. The file would even be encrypted over the connection since everything passes through the ssh tunnel. [...]
Plus, they don't include quite enough Unicode glyphs for my needs
(actually, do they even support unicode at all?!).

not really, I don't think so anyway. They (at least on my box) have some iso 8859-1 characters, but not beyond that.

Yeah, so it's unusable for me. :-( [...]
I remember in the old DOS days, some games would load up custom
graphics into the video card's text font buffer, so that they can
draw sprites just by writing the corresponding characters into the
video card's text buffer.

god yes, and even the built in DOS graphics could be utterly beautiful. Or the OEM font as I guess it should be called. My image_basicdrawing.d embeds that font too because I like it lol. BTW I'm pretty sure Unicode has a few user defined sections that would be ideal for this. You set a bitmap for your user defined characters and then send them right out. Though it makes me wonder: should it be a 1 bit bitmap? Or palette somehow? idk, for anti aliasing it seems to me you'd want to do a few bits that is just alpha, with the colors being defined elsewhere. But the NES had a sweet 4 color setup for its tiles! Eh though, this is a text terminal, let's not go too nuts.

Right, 'cos then the next thing you know, you'd be wanting to support arbitrary-sized bitmaps, which then leads to it being used for fonts, which then turns into a proportional font layout problem, which then turns into a GUI, reinvented. :-P
 The magic display image sequence can be full color.

Yep. T -- Chance favours the prepared mind. -- Louis Pasteur
Sep 19 2013
prev sibling parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 17:04:46 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 It's a miniscule time savings, but it does add up when you're 
 editing a complex command-line pipeline.

You know what would actually be huge for me? The mouse. If you have a 200 character command line, just clicking it would be so nice. I'm sure there's some ctrl+meta+alt that can do it too, but I don't know my emacs (and readline's vi mode is weak). Eventually I'll finish my terminal emulator that will include that kind of thing. Probably on a wild combo like ctrl+alt+click so I don't accidentally trigger it when I don't want to. But I'm not in a huge rush to write that since I actually quite like rxvt and xterm.
 Eek. I use C-s frequently for throttling program output; it 
 would suck to have to escape it!

heh, I use gigantic scroll back buffers for that whenever I can.
 inability to handle UTF-8 (in this day and age! seriously!).

The X server doesn't make utf-8 easy... I was looking into utf8 input for simpledisplay.d and it is kinda complicated. (Another advantage Windows has - it's been unicode aware for a long time.) But, how much do you really need for a window manager?
 have the new mobo serving as a headless compute server, then I 
 can have the best of both worlds!

yes! (BTW, I just hit esc after typing that. I'm on the website, but that's my vi habit - enter something, then immediately hit esc to get back to command mode. When I was a vi newb I spent most my time in insert mode, but now I'm only rarely in there - just long enough to actually insert, then it is back to command immediately.)
 Really? I never had a kernel panic from misconfigured X11.

The kernel panics were from earlier in the boot process. For example, NFS over my at the time 10mbps hub was very unreliable, so it went to mount the root filesystem, lost some packets, and kernel panicked. IIRC I ended up fixing that by making nfs use tcp connections rather than the unreliable udp datagrams. Of course, X wasn't easy either. It didn't autoconfigure right, the driver that was supposed to work for the chip didn't (the screen would be garbled), and the other settings are just whoooo. I can only imagine how awful it was before then - at least my monitors weren't at risk of frying themselves. (or was that a myth too? i don't know but i'd believe it) It did work with the vesa driver though pretty reliably, but that couldn't max out the potential of that 1 MB of video ram! But that's ok 800x600 looks good anyway.
 annoying, since the kernel (and every else) actually still 
 works, and I can ssh into it, etc., but it's unusable from the 
 desk and

Maybe svgalib could have helped there too. But yeah, X.org my old motherboard would do something similarly annoying: all input and output at the desktop would freeze dead, all of it, but I could still ssh into the machine so clearly the kernel was still alive. Even switching vt wouldn't work, X locked up and took the hardware with it. Sometimes, kill -9 X via ssh would fix it, but sometimes that just left it in another indeterminate state that wouldn't recover properly either, forcing the reboot. The weird thing though is sometimes, if I just left it alone for 30 mins or so, it would actually fix itself. Maybe had to do with power management, i don't know. My new motherboard is a lot saner. Other than the alsa volume control problem (pretty minor all things considered) it has worked very well. But I guess we'll see if it continues to when it is 5 years old too. My pentium 1 box, now 16 years old, works flawlessly to this day. But cliched as it is, they don't make 'em like they used to.
 Well, nowadays X.org is pretty good about autodetecting most 
 settings,

Indeed, I was pleasantly surprised with the 64 bit install almost just working. I still installed the proprietary nvidia driver for 3d acceleration, but at least it all came up. The diskless fun was several years ago, I'm sure it'd be better now.
 pretty efficient unlike X11, but it doesn't support unicode 
 fonts.

You sure? I thought it does now, if you enable the kernel framebuffer. (Now I like the vga text mode, so no framebuffer for me, but I'm pretty sure the new stuff is workable there.)
 Hooray for rewriting old lost projects in D. :) You'd probably 
 get it back up and running faster anyway, thanks to D's awesome 
 features.

I can use my own terminal.d instead of ncurses too, yay.
 What I'd *really* like, is to extend the Linux console to 
 handle inline
 graphics (rounded to the next largest multiple of the character 
 tile size).

Heh, I've been thinking about that too. Part of the reason terminal.d has an enum { linear, cellular } is due to a design I've been pondering (and, of course, it matches right up to the alternate screen feature of linux terminals too). If graphics were available in linear mode, cat file.png would go right ahead and draw it out there. Or something like that, it'd probably need an escape sequence to enable graphic mode to be sane. And then cellular mode would be a framebuffer as well as a text buffer. Believe it or not, the BIOS on DOS used to kinda support all this! If you switched to mode 13h and printf()'d, at least using Digital Mars C, maybe it is a dm runtime feature rather than the BIOS or DOS or whatever, but if you did that, the text would indeed output, and you can still write graphics. In mode 3, vga text mode, the graphics stuff would just be swallowed and/or replaced by alternate text (omg I have a program that renders arbitrary images to ascii art. If you run a .mpg through it, you can actually watch movies on a text terminal! tempting to try to write that... but i'd prolly just keep it simple), but if you're in a graphics capable window and cat image, sure, let's show it. I almost think I saw a terminal program that did that. But I want to write my own terminal emulator and specification anyway.
 Which, if I'm going to do it at all, I rather rewrite in D 
 instead.

aye
 Ratpoison had it right -- C-w and it shows a popup at the top 
 right corner of the screen containing a *vertical* list of 
 windows with full names.

Yeah, I have something similar on my windows key + tab hotkey as well as right as middle click on the edge of the screen. But what's important about the task bar is you can see it without asking for a popup. So then, say, I get an IM and it adds a * to the left side of the name, and now I can see it without making an effort. The other nice thing is the programs stay in a certain space. Most the titles on my thing are just 'rxvt' - pretty useless. But I know the one on the left is one thing, the one in the middle is another, etc. And of course, gnu screen with C-a " does the list too, which is great.
  Trying
 to cram everything into a *horizontal* bar just doesn't scale 
 beyond 10 items or so.

I have 17 open on this workspace and can even read the names! My custom taskbar though is 16 pixels tall, writes out the names in fixed-10 font (normally I'd consider that way too small to read, but it looks good down there), has only two pixels padding between the buttons, and almost no nonsense: no start button, quick launch bar, notification area. It does have a clock, I like clocks, but it consumes only about 40 pixels. One of the reasons I did my own though was that all other taskbars indeed couldn't scale. They made stupid decisions with too many windows and wasted space with too few. At least a vertical list, given a small enough
 font, can
 support at least 25 items, probably more like 40, before a 
 scrollbar is
 even needed.

blargh i need to stop dreaming of and talking about my ideal linux and get to work! lol
Sep 16 2013
next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 04:55:06PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
[...]
 Something else I love from the good old days: palette swaps.

Yeah! Those were cool! You could use exactly the same sprites, but change the palette, to produce what looks like different sprites. :) [...]
 When your life ran low, it changed the font entry from white to red.
 But, of course, there's other places that used that entry too - the
 NES had only a 16 color palette (with only 4 colors per tile) so
 reuse was a necessity - so you'd have parts of the world changing to
 red too!

Oh, that brings back memories of X11 running on 16-color EGA with a palette... some applications would rewrite the palette in order to better display a high-color image, so when you moved your mouse into the window, the rest of the world turns into psychedelic colors, and when you moved your mouse back out, the world turns sane but now the image turns psychedelic. T -- Creativity is not an excuse for sloppiness.
Sep 19 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 09:43:33PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 16:49:34 +0200
 "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:
 
 On Wednesday, 18 September 2013 at 20:33:10 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Plus, they don't include quite enough Unicode glyphs for my 
 needs (actually, do they even support unicode at all?!).

not really, I don't think so anyway. They (at least on my box) have some iso 8859-1 characters, but not beyond that.

I've always felt text rendering engines should be able to automatically fallback to another font for any characters that aren't in the selected font. (Ideally with a user-configurable chain of fallbacks, similar to CSS, but selected on a per-character basis.) Because showing the right character in a mismatched font has *got* to be better than not showing the character at all and a generic "missing font" glyph.

Opera actually does this. But sometimes it can backfire, like the time when my default font didn't contain the glyph for the symbol, and opera used a 5-pixel-wide substitute scaled up to 18 pixels with horrible, horrible antialiasing artifacts that made it nigh unreadable. But then again, Opera didn't exactly provide a way to specify the order of font resolution either, so that didn't help. I agree that *sane* fallback fonts (with configurable fallback order!) would be much better than just a black blob of ink (or pixels). [...]
 BTW I'm pretty sure Unicode has a few user defined sections that
 would be ideal for this. You set a bitmap for your user defined
 characters and then send them right out.

Unicode even has (experimental, last I checked) pages defined for a variety of common (and not-so-common) non-text symbols. The four playing card suits, methods of transportation, etc.

That's no longer experimental. Even within the BMP alone (U+0 .. U+FFFF), there are entire codepages dedicated to symbols, dingbats, etc.. Any modern Unicode font should have most of these symbols by default (though unlikely *all* -- there are *that* many of them!). Better yet, there's the Private Use region that you can map to basically anything you want, including a range in the BMP (U+E000 .. U+F8FF) consisting of a whopping 6400 code points. Just the thing you need for custom bitmaps and other fun stuff. :) T -- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? Who knows? Who cares? -- Erich Schubert
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:24:16 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 
 But then again, Opera didn't exactly provide a way to specify the
 order of font resolution either, so that didn't help. I agree that
 *sane* fallback fonts (with configurable fallback order!) would be
 much better than just a black blob of ink (or pixels).
 

Actually, I'm thinking now, maybe font fallbacks should be specified in terms of "Font X's fallback is Font Y or otherwise Font Z". Ie, the chain of fallbacks for missing glyphs should be a property of the font itself. Obviously user-editable, *but* with sensible defaults, since that would be a *lot* of fonts/fallbacks to manually configure.
 
 [...]
 BTW I'm pretty sure Unicode has a few user defined sections that
 would be ideal for this. You set a bitmap for your user defined
 characters and then send them right out.

Unicode even has (experimental, last I checked) pages defined for a variety of common (and not-so-common) non-text symbols. The four playing card suits, methods of transportation, etc.

That's no longer experimental. Even within the BMP alone (U+0 .. U+FFFF), there are entire codepages dedicated to symbols, dingbats,

Hey now, just 'cause someone wants to use non-text glyphs doesn't mean you should go calling him a dingbat! ;) (j/k, of course)
Sep 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "monarch_dodra" <monarchdodra gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:58:06 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 08:38:49PM +0000, Justin Whear wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 20:02:02 +0000, Justin Whear wrote:
 
 vim and gvim on linux.

Unix is my IDE.

+1, I like that!! :) I'm gonna hafta start saying that from now on, whenever people ask me about IDEs. T

notepad++ on windows. kate on linux. Though I do *try* to learn vim (as in, be efficient with it, not quite there yet).
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Justin Whear <justin economicmodeling.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 22:46:45 +0200, Peter Alexander wrote:

 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:44:52 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:38:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
 BTW, one veery nice thing about ME is I can run it from a remote
 console window.

Yea, that's a big reason I use vim too. I do a lot of my work through remote connections and having my trusty editor available with good speed and resumeability where I left off (thanks to gnu screen) is a huge nice thing.

Do you actually write significant amounts of code on remote machines? I'm struggling to find a reason to do that.

I don't write a lot of code remotely aside from the infrequent quickfix on our testing server. But I do quite a bit of editing of configurations on remote boxes; because vim is installed by default in linux, it's just matter of cloning my vim bundle (https://github.com/jwhear/vim- bundle.git) into my home directory on the remote machine and boom, my full install complete with plugins.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 10:46:45PM +0200, Peter Alexander wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:44:52 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:38:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
BTW, one veery nice thing about ME is I can run it from a remote
console window.

Yea, that's a big reason I use vim too. I do a lot of my work through remote connections and having my trusty editor available with good speed and resumeability where I left off (thanks to gnu screen) is a huge nice thing.

Do you actually write significant amounts of code on remote machines? I'm struggling to find a reason to do that.

I do. I prefer to keep code in a single place, i.e., on my PC, so when I'm away from my desk (travelling, house-sitting for my mother-in-law, etc.), I use GNU screen over ssh. Screen, especially, lets me continue the same coding session in the little bits of free time I have here and there (start coding in the morning, pause to get to work, work on work, resume coding during lunch break, get back to work, resume while waiting for long work-related build to finish, go back to work, resume at mother-in-law's house while waiting for people to show up for dinner, pause to have dinner, resume after dinner while waiting for wife to walk the dog, etc.). One of the most complex algorithms I've ever implemented for a personal project (C++ at the time) was all done over ssh from my mother-in-law's while house-sitting for her. T -- If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping in a closed room with a mosquito. -- Jan van Steenbergen
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent captaindet <2krnk gmx.net> writes:
mostly geany with bud/build

so i don't need any project files but can easily tackle small and medium sized
projects. i love the way how bud tracks down all imports, (can) clean up after
compilation, and handles different sets of options in option groups - and geany
does the rest

one of my projects might grow big enough to benefit from a full-fledged IDE,
probably MonoD as this project is multi-platform. otherwise VisualD as VS is
more stable than monodevelop. i played with both but in general, i find those
big IDEs to awkward to deal with for small projects.

/det
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:46:46 UTC, Peter Alexander 
wrote:
 Do you actually write significant amounts of code on remote 
 machines? I'm struggling to find a reason to do that.

Yeah, I'd say about half my time is spent on a remote computer, generally my laptop. All my files and programs are on my desktop, but I'm not always there. Sometimes I just want to sit in an other room or in the yard, but often (several hours a day, almost every day) I'm at a friend's house keeping an eye on their kids. Since the kids almost take care of themselves, I bring my laptop and continue to do my computer work from there too.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:51:50 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
 I'd normally use. I love sshfs, I wish Windows had it.

I actually shelled out... I think $20 a few years ago, for a program called ExpanDrive on Windows, which connects via ssh to my Linux box and presents it as a windows drive. Pretty cool, it works fairly well and is a nice supplement to putty.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Flamaros" <flamaros.xavier gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

Mainly VisualD and for linux Mono-D. Mono-D have a great auto completion.
Sep 13 2013
parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 14.09.2013 00:50, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 12:37:51AM +0200, Namespace wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:23:48 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 23:30:55 +0200
 "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:
 I'm suprised that so few use an IDE. :D

I think IDE users have been avoiding D due to (perceived?) issues with D's IDE support. So those of us that do use D tend to be the ones who don't rely on IDEs. "Chicken and egg"

Next time I should ask who use which OS. ;)

I started using Linux around 1996 or so. Never looked back since. T

I use a mix of Windows and whatever Linux distribution that works out of the box. -- Paulo
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Sean Kelly <sean invisibleduck.org> writes:
Sublime Text 3
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:09:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 I do. I prefer to keep code in a single place, i.e., on my PC, 
 so when I'm away from my desk (travelling, house-sitting for my 
 mother-in-law, etc.), I use GNU screen over ssh.

The headers of your messages tell me that you probably do email the same way I do too: keep it all on the home computer and ssh in with mutt! (I use the website for replying to D postings though, since the mailing list interface I find unreliable for outgoing messages.)
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

GNU Emacs
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent =?UTF-8?B?UsOpbXkgTW91w6t6YQ==?= <remy.moueza gmail.com> writes:
Ubuntu Linux with:
- gvim compiled with the breakindent patch (that I had to patch myself 
for the vim source I checked out) for nicely wrapped and indented long 
lines (mostly used outside D programming).
- xfce4-terminal
- rdmd for simple programs,
- gnu make when interfacing with C/C++.

On 09/13/2013 09:48 PM, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try
 this evening VisualD.

Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 23:10 +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]
 Yeah, I'd say about half my time is spent on a remote computer,=20
 generally my laptop.
=20
 All my files and programs are on my desktop, but I'm not always=20
 there. Sometimes I just want to sit in an other room or in the=20
 yard, but often (several hours a day, almost every day) I'm at a=20
 friend's house keeping an eye on their kids. Since the kids=20
 almost take care of themselves, I bring my laptop and continue to=20
 do my computer work from there too.

This is why I use Unison to ensure that all my filestores (server, workstation, two Linux laptops, two OS X laptops, all have replicas of my personal filestore. It avoids the need for being always properly connected to the Internet. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 23:20 +0200, John Colvin wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I=20
 will try this evening VisualD.

GNU Emacs

Emacs 24, there is no other editor. :-) --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:00:49PM +0200, monarch_dodra wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:58:06 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 08:38:49PM +0000, Justin Whear wrote:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 20:02:02 +0000, Justin Whear wrote:

 vim and gvim on linux.

Unix is my IDE.

+1, I like that!! :) I'm gonna hafta start saying that from now on, whenever people ask me about IDEs. T

notepad++ on windows. kate on linux. Though I do *try* to learn vim (as in, be efficient with it, not quite there yet).

vim (and all vi-derived editors) is... shall we say, a unique beast all its own. It requires a different *mode* of thinking (har har) than your usual GUI-based editors. In most other editors, you think in terms of "move cursor here, type some characters, move cursor there, hit delete a few times", etc.. But in vi(m), you operate on a different level of abstraction. Rather than thinking in terms of individual cursor movements and single-character operations, you're thinking in terms of abstract editing operations: "go to the word that begins with 'vo', replace the word with 'int', go back to the start of the paragraph, open a new line of text above it", etc.. For many years, I hated vi, vim, and all of its ilk. I found them all very foreign and counterintuitive, and therefore unproductive. It wasn't until my supervisor at my first job persuaded me to try it, that I finally, reluctantly, sat down to learn it for real. At first, I hated its modality -- being used to the *other* kind of editors all my life till then, I found myself fighting with vi's modality all the time -- because I was still thinking in the other mindset, you see. But most of the machines I had to work with at the time didn't have a sufficiently-sane editor on it (for a while I was copying pico onto every machine I lay my hands on, but that grew tiresome), except vi, which was installed by default on Solaris. So I was forced to use vi a lot. And then it started to grow on me. I found myself thinking more and more in terms of abstract operations like I described above, rather than individual cursor movements and keypresses. And I started acquiring that twitch in my left little finger that wants to hit ESC every now and then, for no good reason. :-P Nowadays, I find myself handicapped when using any non-vi editor. What, you mean I have to take my hands off their usual place on the keyboard just to move the cursor?! Why does every keypress modify the text?! Why doesn't hitting ESC put me in navigation mode?! Why doesn't ':wq' work?! Why can't I move down by 12 paragraphs instead of hitting the down key 120 times?! (Which, incidentally, takes only 3 keystrokes in vim: '12}'.) *shrug* T -- Acid falls with the rain; with love comes the pain.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:15:03 UTC, Flamaros wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

Mainly VisualD and for linux Mono-D. Mono-D have a great auto completion.

That's true. But is it better than with VisualD? I'm suprised that so few use an IDE. :D
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:18:45PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:09:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I do. I prefer to keep code in a single place, i.e., on my PC, so
when I'm away from my desk (travelling, house-sitting for my
mother-in-law, etc.), I use GNU screen over ssh.

The headers of your messages tell me that you probably do email the same way I do too: keep it all on the home computer and ssh in with mutt!

Yup! I grew up with pine, until its limitations left me pining for something better... (har har) I tried several alternatives but didn't like any of them, until I met mutt. Mutt is far more configurable than pine, and can handle a lot of stuff pine can't (this was over a decade ago, though, I don't know if this is still true... or if pine even exists anymore). I hate leaving my mail on some remote mailserver; I like keeping it all on my home PC (so that they are always accessible even if my 'Net connection goes down every now and then). So I set up my MX to deliver all mail to my PC, and I check mail with ssh/mutt. Nowadays I can even do this from my Android phone, though the low resolution and lack of a real keyboard does make it rather awkward to use.
 (I use the website for replying to D postings though, since the
 mailing list interface I find unreliable for outgoing messages.)

The website is too GUI-like for my tastes. I prefer doing everything from mutt. :) T -- Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence. -- Napoleon Bonaparte
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:12:15PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:51:50 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
I'd normally use. I love sshfs, I wish Windows had it.

I actually shelled out... I think $20 a few years ago, for a program called ExpanDrive on Windows, which connects via ssh to my Linux box and presents it as a windows drive. Pretty cool, it works fairly well and is a nice supplement to putty.

Putty is about the only reason I can tolerate using Windows at all... I mean, what else is Windows for, if not logging into a *real* OS where the real work is done? ;-) T -- What do you mean the Internet isn't filled with subliminal messages? What about all those buttons marked "submit"??
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Friday, September 13, 2013 21:48:15 Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.
 
 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I
 will try this evening VisualD.

I use gvim regardless of the language that I'm writing in. I even use it for word processing, because if I have to write a document that requires that, I use LaTex. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 13 2013
parent =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:
On 09/13/2013 02:42 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Friday, September 13, 2013 21:48:15 Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I
 will try this evening VisualD.

I use gvim regardless of the language that I'm writing in. I even use it for word processing, because if I have to write a document that requires that, I use LaTex. - Jonathan M Davis

+1 Except mine is Emacs. :) Ali
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:40:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:12:15PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 20:51:50 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
 wrote:
I'd normally use. I love sshfs, I wish Windows had it.

I actually shelled out... I think $20 a few years ago, for a program called ExpanDrive on Windows, which connects via ssh to my Linux box and presents it as a windows drive. Pretty cool, it works fairly well and is a nice supplement to putty.

Putty is about the only reason I can tolerate using Windows at all... I mean, what else is Windows for, if not logging into a *real* OS where the real work is done? ;-) T

tz ;)
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:28:01 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
 On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 23:20 +0200, John Colvin wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But 
 I will try this evening VisualD.

GNU Emacs

Emacs 24, there is no other editor. :-)

With DCD as well, I really couldn't imagine a better environment for coding in D.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "w0rp" <devw0rp gmail.com> writes:
I use GVim myself, with syntastic for checking for errors when I 
hit save.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 02:35:07PM -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
 On 9/13/2013 1:58 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Syntax highlighting hurts my eyes. I've been using vim in
black-on-white for more than a decade now. (Well, more accurately,
black on an almost fully saturated off-white, but that's irrelevant.)

I tend to agree. I think syntax highlighting looks better if it's a subtle color change, not a glaring one. Unfortunately, in text mode, color palette is very limited.

Xterm has a 256-color mode that can be used for subtler highlighting, I suppose. But still, syntax highlighting to me is merely something peripheral, and I'm a minimalist. Besides, 256-color mode isn't always supported when you're working over ssh. Not to mention, syntax highlighting falls down upon encountering q{} blocks. (It *can* be made to highlight those as well, I suppose, but it leads to the awkward situation where you can't tell whether that's code or a string literal.) T -- If you look at a thing nine hundred and ninety-nine times, you are perfectly safe; if you look at it the thousandth time, you are in frightful danger of seeing it for the first time. -- G. K. Chesterton
Sep 13 2013
next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 05:58:51AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:19:42 +0200
 Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:

 laptops sold with Linux support.

Those exist? I've long heard stories about such things, but they seem to be like unicorns or mermaids or bigfoot...fantasy creatures you only ever hear tales "through the grapevine" about. Not so much real evidence or first-hand accounts.

I used to own one of them. It came preinstalled with Debian, so I'd like to say to all the accusations of FOSS zealotry: so there! ;-) It does have some binary blobs for a few device drivers, though, but that didn't pose a problem 'cos they were custom-installed by the manufacturers, so apt-get upgrade left them alone for the most part. It worked pretty well as a laptop -- I of course nuked the default GUI configuration and installed my own (at the time I was still into vtwm -- this was before my ratpoison days -- so it wasn't *too* foreign from the preinstalled setup). But then the warranty expired, and so did the PSU. I took it in for repair once, which was extremely expensive, but it didn't last very long after. That was when I acquired a strong distaste for laptops -- I learned that they have basically *no* user-serviceable parts, and even something as simple as installing a different hard drive (simple on a desktop, anyway) required custom tools that only laptop manufacturers or repair shops have access to. Besides, even if you could find the tools, laptop parts generally aren't sold in the consumer market anyway, and they are also very model-specific, so there's no such thing as going out to buy a replacement for a failing part. It's take it in to the repair shop and pay an arm and a leg for the repair which exceeds the cost of buying a new laptop. Sigh...
 As an example, last April, an Ubuntu update borked my wireless
 driver, because of religious FOSS. Ubuntu developers changed the
 binary broadcom driver, working flawlessly, for the open source one,
 which was still half done.
 
 There is a discussion about it on their forums, if you want a link
 for it.
 

Well, I don't use Ubuntu anymore for my Linux boxes. Migrated upstream to Debian. Any idea if one of the less religious distros (like Mint) would be decent for a laptop, or are non-OSS drivers merely one issue?

I'd advise caution and very *very* thorough research before purchasing a laptop. Some laptops have hardware with no known Linux drivers (not even binary blobs), so no matter which distro you choose, it wouldn't work. One approach might be to look up a laptop model known to have been used by a Linux-preinstalled manufacturer -- then you know there are drivers for it out there somewhere. Suitable googling should be able to get you downloadable blobs and installation instructions. Sadly, hardware support for Linux is still spotty esp. for newly-released hardware, as most manufacturers tend to prefer working with proprietary-backed OSes first (esp. if some new features are developed in tandem between them). (Caveat: I swore off laptops since 6-7 years ago, so my information may be outdated.) T -- Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--047d7b5d4e5e4831c804e6557a17
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 14, 2013 11:25 AM, "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 05:58:51AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:19:42 +0200
 Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:

 laptops sold with Linux support.

Those exist? I've long heard stories about such things, but they seem to be like unicorns or mermaids or bigfoot...fantasy creatures you only ever hear tales "through the grapevine" about. Not so much real evidence or first-hand accounts.

I used to own one of them. It came preinstalled with Debian, so I'd like to say to all the accusations of FOSS zealotry: so there! ;-) It does have some binary blobs for a few device drivers, though, but that didn't pose a problem 'cos they were custom-installed by the manufacturers, so apt-get upgrade left them alone for the most part. It worked pretty well as a laptop -- I of course nuked the default GUI configuration and installed my own (at the time I was still into vtwm -- this was before my ratpoison days -- so it wasn't *too* foreign from the preinstalled setup). But then the warranty expired, and so did the PSU. I took it in for repair once, which was extremely expensive, but it didn't last very long after. That was when I acquired a strong distaste for laptops -- I learned that they have basically *no* user-serviceable parts, and even something as simple as installing a different hard drive (simple on a desktop, anyway) required custom tools that only laptop manufacturers or repair shops have access to. Besides, even if you could find the tools, laptop parts generally aren't sold in the consumer market anyway, and they are also very model-specific, so there's no such thing as going out to buy a replacement for a failing part. It's take it in to the repair shop and pay an arm and a leg for the repair which exceeds the cost of buying a new laptop. Sigh...
 As an example, last April, an Ubuntu update borked my wireless
 driver, because of religious FOSS. Ubuntu developers changed the
 binary broadcom driver, working flawlessly, for the open source one,
 which was still half done.

 There is a discussion about it on their forums, if you want a link
 for it.

Well, I don't use Ubuntu anymore for my Linux boxes. Migrated upstream to Debian. Any idea if one of the less religious distros (like Mint) would be decent for a laptop, or are non-OSS drivers merely one issue?

I'd advise caution and very *very* thorough research before purchasing a laptop. Some laptops have hardware with no known Linux drivers (not even binary blobs), so no matter which distro you choose, it wouldn't work.

Some manufacturers even actively work against Linux at the hardware level. http://linuxologist.com/02hardware/even-more-incriminating-evidence-in-the-foxconn-debacle/ Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --047d7b5d4e5e4831c804e6557a17 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 <p><br> On Sep 14, 2013 11:25 AM, &quot;H. S. Teoh&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx">hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 05:58:51AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:19:42 +0200<br> &gt; &gt; Paulo Pinto &lt;<a href="mailto:pjmlp progtools.org">pjmlp progtools.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt; [...]<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; laptops sold with Linux support.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; Those exist?<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; I&#39;ve long heard stories about such things, but they seem to be like<br> &gt; &gt; unicorns or mermaids or bigfoot...fantasy creatures you only ever hear<br> &gt; &gt; tales &quot;through the grapevine&quot; about. Not so much real evidence or<br> &gt; &gt; first-hand accounts.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; I used to own one of them. It came preinstalled with Debian, so I&#39;d like<br> &gt; to say to all the accusations of FOSS zealotry: so there! ;-)<br> &gt;<br> &gt; It does have some binary blobs for a few device drivers, though, but<br> &gt; that didn&#39;t pose a problem &#39;cos they were custom-installed by the<br> &gt; manufacturers, so apt-get upgrade left them alone for the most part.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; It worked pretty well as a laptop -- I of course nuked the default GUI<br> &gt; configuration and installed my own (at the time I was still into vtwm --<br> &gt; this was before my ratpoison days -- so it wasn&#39;t *too* foreign from the<br> &gt; preinstalled setup). But then the warranty expired, and so did the PSU.<br> &gt; I took it in for repair once, which was extremely expensive, but it<br> &gt; didn&#39;t last very long after. That was when I acquired a strong distaste<br> &gt; for laptops -- I learned that they have basically *no* user-serviceable<br> &gt; parts, and even something as simple as installing a different hard drive<br> &gt; (simple on a desktop, anyway) required custom tools that only laptop<br> &gt; manufacturers or repair shops have access to. Besides, even if you could<br> &gt; find the tools, laptop parts generally aren&#39;t sold in the consumer<br> &gt; market anyway, and they are also very model-specific, so there&#39;s no such<br> &gt; thing as going out to buy a replacement for a failing part. It&#39;s take it<br> &gt; in to the repair shop and pay an arm and a leg for the repair which<br> &gt; exceeds the cost of buying a new laptop. Sigh...<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; As an example, last April, an Ubuntu update borked my wireless<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; driver, because of religious FOSS. Ubuntu developers changed the<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; binary broadcom driver, working flawlessly, for the open source one,<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; which was still half done.<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; There is a discussion about it on their forums, if you want a link<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; for it.<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; Well, I don&#39;t use Ubuntu anymore for my Linux boxes. Migrated upstream<br> &gt; &gt; to Debian. Any idea if one of the less religious distros (like Mint)<br> &gt; &gt; would be decent for a laptop, or are non-OSS drivers merely one issue?<br> &gt;<br> &gt; I&#39;d advise caution and very *very* thorough research before purchasing a<br> &gt; laptop. Some laptops have hardware with no known Linux drivers (not even<br> &gt; binary blobs), so no matter which distro you choose, it wouldn&#39;t work.</p> <p>Some manufacturers even actively work against Linux at the hardware level.</p> <p><a href="http://linuxologist.com/02hardware/even-more-incriminating-evidence-in-the-foxconn-debacle/">http://linuxologist.com/02hardware/even-more-incriminating-evidence-in-the-foxconn-debacle/</a></p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) = (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;</p> --047d7b5d4e5e4831c804e6557a17--
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 03:23:21 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 
 That was when I
 acquired a strong distaste for laptops -- I learned that they have
 basically *no* user-serviceable parts

Yea, that is the one thing I really hate about laptops. *Other* than that, they're like desktops that you can realistically unplug and take with you (abiet with a sub-par keyboard and pointing device when you're using it on-the-go - but that's better than the "nothing" you get on-the-go with a desktop).
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:31:44 +0100
Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:
 
 Some manufacturers even actively work against Linux at the hardware
 level.
 
 http://linuxologist.com/02hardware/even-more-incriminating-evidence-in-the-foxconn-debacle/
 

Yea. I don't know this will just turn out to just be more Palladium-like anti-MS FUD, but UEFI really worries me. To the point where I'd be very hesitant to buy any computer with Win8 pre-installed. (Not that I'd want to pay the MS tax anyway for an OS I'd immediately wipe off of the HDD.)
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--001a11c233ae9c76be04e66948f1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 15, 2013 12:55 AM, "Nick Sabalausky" <
SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:31:44 +0100
 Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:
 Some manufacturers even actively work against Linux at the hardware
 level.



Yea. I don't know this will just turn out to just be more Palladium-like anti-MS FUD, but UEFI really worries me. To the point where I'd be very hesitant to buy any computer with Win8 pre-installed. (Not that I'd want to pay the MS tax anyway for an OS I'd immediately wipe off of the HDD.)

I've actually taken a rash decision and won't buy another x86/x86_64 device again (going full ARM in the next years once my current kit reaches it's end of life). Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --001a11c233ae9c76be04e66948f1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 <p><br> On Sep 15, 2013 12:55 AM, &quot;Nick Sabalausky&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com">SeeWebsiteToContactMe s mitwist.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:31:44 +0100<br> &gt; Iain Buclaw &lt;<a href="mailto:ibuclaw ubuntu.com">ibuclaw ubuntu.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; Some manufacturers even actively work against Linux at the hardware<br> &gt; &gt; level.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; <a href="http://linuxologist.com/02hardware/even-more-incriminating-evidence-in-the-foxconn-debacle/">http://linuxologist.com/02hardware/even-more-incriminating-evidence-in-the-foxconn-debacle/</a><br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; Yea. I don&#39;t know this will just turn out to just be more Palladium-like<br> &gt; anti-MS FUD, but UEFI really worries me. To the point where I&#39;d be very<br> &gt; hesitant to buy any computer with Win8 pre-installed. (Not that I&#39;d<br> &gt; want to pay the MS tax anyway for an OS I&#39;d immediately wipe off of the<br> &gt; HDD.)<br> &gt;</p> <p>I&#39;ve actually taken a rash decision and won&#39;t buy another x86/x86_64 device again (going full ARM in the next years once my current kit reaches it&#39;s end of life).</p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) = (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;</p> --001a11c233ae9c76be04e66948f1--
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:04:25AM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 Am 15.09.2013 01:35, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 17:38:52 +0200
"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 06:57:23 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Windows and most of the other distros at the time offered: the
ability to install a bare minimum system that could still
function without *requiring* X11

oh god X11 was too brutally slow to use on an older computer anyway. Windows 95 was actually fast.


An interesting anecdote. At the begining of my UNIX days, it was a pleasure to use the usual set of APIs, which tend to be less convoluted than on Windows. Then I started looking into X11 programming with Xlib and Motif, and could not believe that they managed to make it even more complex than any other desktop graphics programming API!

Once, in college, I had the totally hare-brained idea of *printing* out the Xlib documentation. Through the department's printer service. It came out as a stack of paper 6 *inches* thick (you do the math as to how many pages that is), which I still have today for posterity. :-P T -- If it breaks, you get to keep both pieces. -- Software disclaimer notice
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 15 September 2013 16:54, Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:
 Am 15.09.2013 12:09, schrieb Iain Buclaw:
 On Sep 15, 2013 12:55 AM, "Nick Sabalausky"
 <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com

 <mailto:SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com>> wrote:
  >
  > On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:31:44 +0100
  > Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com <mailto:ibuclaw ubuntu.com>> wrote:
  > >
  > > Some manufacturers even actively work against Linux at the hardware
  > > level.
  > >
  > >

 http://linuxologist.com/02hardware/even-more-incriminating-evidence-in-the-foxconn-debacle/
  > >
  >
  > Yea. I don't know this will just turn out to just be more
 Palladium-like
  > anti-MS FUD, but UEFI really worries me. To the point where I'd be very
  > hesitant to buy any computer with Win8 pre-installed. (Not that I'd
  > want to pay the MS tax anyway for an OS I'd immediately wipe off of the
  > HDD.)
  >

 I've actually taken a rash decision and won't buy another x86/x86_64
 device again (going full ARM in the next years once my current kit
 reaches it's end of life).

 Regards
 --
 Iain Buclaw

 *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';

Using a Raspberry Pi as desktop?

Nah, not nearly powerful enough for my daily usage. Got a sheevaplug that I use as a NFS server/Wireless AP. A Trimslice that is a useable desktop - but haven't pick it up much as I don't have a monitor kicking around to connect to it. Later next month am getting a Parallella board that should replace my development laptop. :-) -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

Mostly stock vim (NerdTree is only absolutely mandatory plugin) + grep + gdb Sometimes I poke Mono-D but more out of curiosity than real necessity.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Justin Whear <justin economicmodeling.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 14:29:02 -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:

 On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:00:49PM +0200, monarch_dodra wrote:
 vim (and all vi-derived editors) is... shall we say, a unique beast all
 its own. It requires a different *mode* of thinking (har har) than your
 usual GUI-based editors.  In most other editors, you think in terms of
 "move cursor here, type some characters, move cursor there, hit delete a
 few times", etc..  But in vi(m), you operate on a different level of
 abstraction. Rather than thinking in terms of individual cursor
 movements and single-character operations, you're thinking in terms of
 abstract editing operations: "go to the word that begins with 'vo',
 replace the word with 'int', go back to the start of the paragraph, open
 a new line of text above it", etc..

I've introduced a few young developers to Vim and the major hole that they tend to fall into is printing out a list of vim "keyboard shortcuts", because that's how other editors work: you memorize a bunch of arbitrary key combinations. So the thing that I emphasize is learning Vim's *language*. Say you already know that "d" means delete--whenever you learn a new noun such as "e" (end of word), you can combine the two: "de" (delete to end of the word). The same applies when you learn a new verb, e.g. "y" for "yank" (copy): "ye" copies from the cursor to the end of the word. Then mix it up with adjectives like counts ("d5e", delete to five word endings) or "i" and "a" (inside and around, "di{" for "delete inside this block").
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 9/13/13, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 Not to mention, syntax highlighting falls down upon encountering q{}
 blocks.

Works on Scite.
  (It *can* be made to highlight those as well, I suppose, but it
 leads to the awkward situation where you can't tell whether that's code
 or a string literal.)

Well that's kind of the point of q{} IMO, to make it appear like code. Otherwise you can use backticks or r"". E.g.: http://imgur.com/UGUuUGU (and lol at the generated imgur name)
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 05:42:18PM -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Friday, September 13, 2013 21:48:15 Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.
 
 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I
 will try this evening VisualD.

I use gvim regardless of the language that I'm writing in. I even use it for word processing, because if I have to write a document that requires that, I use LaTex.

+1. I use vim (bare text mode, no GUI, so no gvim for me) for literally *everything*. Everything from system config files to coding to LaTeX for word-processing to scripted graphics processing (thanks to imagemagick) to povray scene files, there's almost nothing in my world that can't be accomplished by vim. :) Sometimes I wonder how the GUI-encumbered people get any work done at all, what with needing to constantly switch their hands between the keyboard and the rodent, wait for a 600MB application to load up 200MB of eye-candy and paint the screen with 50 toolbar controls, 45 of which that they never actually use, click through endless layers of nested menus just to perform a single operation, etc.. ;-) (OK, OK, so I'm a fossilized relic from the last ice age of '75, I'll stop the GUI-bashing now. :-P You may carry on.) T -- Skill without imagination is craftsmanship and gives us many useful objects such as wickerwork picnic baskets. Imagination without skill gives us modern art. -- Tom Stoppard
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "simendsjo" <simendsjo gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

Vim, VisualD and some Mono-D (when on GNU/Linux). When using Mono-D, I have a shortcut to open the file at the current location in vim as MonoDevelop/Xamarin Studio sucks at vi emulation. For Visual Studio, ViEmu works very well, but it's not free. Worth the $100 though. Vim for all smaller things, and otherwise when I need it.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:50:53PM +0200, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
 On 9/13/13, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 Not to mention, syntax highlighting falls down upon encountering q{}
 blocks.

Works on Scite.
  (It *can* be made to highlight those as well, I suppose, but it
 leads to the awkward situation where you can't tell whether that's code
 or a string literal.)

Well that's kind of the point of q{} IMO, to make it appear like code. Otherwise you can use backticks or r"". E.g.:

True, you have a point there. :)
 http://imgur.com/UGUuUGU
 
 (and lol at the generated imgur name)

Heh. Reminds of "point-and-grunt". ;-) T -- The two rules of success: 1. Don't tell everything you know. -- YHL
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Friday, September 13, 2013 14:58:48 H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 05:42:18PM -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Friday, September 13, 2013 21:48:15 Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.
 
 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I
 will try this evening VisualD.

I use gvim regardless of the language that I'm writing in. I even use it for word processing, because if I have to write a document that requires that, I use LaTex.

[...] +1. I use vim (bare text mode, no GUI, so no gvim for me)

I don't actually use any of the GUI controls. It's just useful to have vim in a window that I can resize (you also get better color choices than in the shell).
 for literally
 *everything*. Everything from system config files to coding to LaTeX for
 word-processing to scripted graphics processing (thanks to imagemagick)
 to povray scene files, there's almost nothing in my world that can't be
 accomplished by vim. :)
 
 Sometimes I wonder how the GUI-encumbered people get any work done at
 all, what with needing to constantly switch their hands between the
 keyboard and the rodent, wait for a 600MB application to load up 200MB
 of eye-candy and paint the screen with 50 toolbar controls, 45 of which
 that they never actually use, click through endless layers of nested
 menus just to perform a single operation, etc.. ;-)
 
 (OK, OK, so I'm a fossilized relic from the last ice age of '75, I'll
 stop the GUI-bashing now. :-P You may carry on.)

LOL. Yeah, the main reason that I don't use IDEs is the fact that they're essentially a glorified version of notepad as far as editing goes. They _do_ usually have better editing capabilities then the ever-so-pathetic notepad, but they can't do much of anything in comparison to the likes of vim or emacs. So, I end up using (g)vim for everything. The features that an IDE has that vim doesn't typically just aren't worth it. e.g. if I'm stuck doing Windows programming, about the most that I even do with VS is use the debugger. I even build from the command line rather than open the IDE. Vim's learning curve is quite nasty, but I definitely think that it was worth it. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 13 2013
next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/13/2013 3:06 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 Vim's learning curve is quite nasty, but I definitely think that it was worth
 it.

I use Vim to edit ME source files so it'll compile on the target machine.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 14.09.2013 00:06, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
 .... The features that an IDE has that
 vim doesn't typically just aren't worth it. e.g. if I'm stuck doing Windows
 programming, about the most that I even do with VS is use the debugger. I even
 build from the command line rather than open the IDE.

 Vim's learning curve is quite nasty, but I definitely think that it was worth
 it.

 - Jonathan M Davis

You mean things like: - Semantic refactoring - WYSIWYG design of user interfaces - code navigation, even across binary modules (call graph, derived class, overridden methods, call sites, ...) - graphical representation of code relationships - UML design - visual XML tooling - background compilation showing where there are issues - background static analysis while coding - code completation with documentation popups - integrate source code control with task management software to track code changes to project tasks - map failed unit tests to code lines - ... -- Paulo
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:45:06 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Xterm has a 256-color mode that can be used for subtler

You can do a palette swap in hardware text mode too (fiddling the vga palette registers, I think it is the same as in mode 13h but it's been a looooong time since I've played with that), the linux console in vga text mode (see man console_codes(4)), and in Windows console: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms686039%28v=vs.85%29.aspx Perhaps bad practice to change that stuff, at least not without changing it back when you're done, but it is doable. Actually, my biggest problem with linux is how terrible the operating system is compared to DOS and Windows. I'm not even kidding, the unix terminal debacle sucks (maybe good when you had various hardware, but it is weak next to what the PC hardware offers), the available system facilities suck (Win32 is plenty usable and reliably there! Even on linux, using a Windows .exe tends to work better than using a linux binary - exe's just work there thanks to wine, whereas linux binaries always have some incompatibility). Eh I'm getting off topic.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 09:48:05PM +0000, Justin Whear wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 14:29:02 -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 
 vim (and all vi-derived editors) is... shall we say, a unique beast
 all its own. It requires a different *mode* of thinking (har har)
 than your usual GUI-based editors.  In most other editors, you think
 in terms of "move cursor here, type some characters, move cursor
 there, hit delete a few times", etc..  But in vi(m), you operate on
 a different level of abstraction. Rather than thinking in terms of
 individual cursor movements and single-character operations, you're
 thinking in terms of abstract editing operations: "go to the word
 that begins with 'vo', replace the word with 'int', go back to the
 start of the paragraph, open a new line of text above it", etc..

I've introduced a few young developers to Vim and the major hole that they tend to fall into is printing out a list of vim "keyboard shortcuts", because that's how other editors work: you memorize a bunch of arbitrary key combinations. So the thing that I emphasize is learning Vim's *language*.

Mmm, I like that description! You're right, it's actually a language, not just a bunch of shortcuts. That's why is far more expressive than a shortcut-based editor. You'd need an exponential number of shortcuts just to keep up with all the possibilities -- clearly impractical.
 Say you already know that "d" means delete--whenever you learn a new
 noun such as "e" (end of word), you can combine the two:  "de" (delete
 to end of the word).  The same applies when you learn a new verb, e.g.
 "y" for "yank" (copy): "ye" copies from the cursor to the end of the
 word.  Then mix it up with adjectives like counts ("d5e", delete to
 five word endings) or "i" and "a" (inside and around, "di{" for
 "delete inside this block").

Heh. Can you believe this is the first time I've heard of 'e', in spite of having used vim for more than a decade? ;-) Here I've been using w and W and thinking they were good enough... I learned something new today. T -- MAS = Mana Ada Sistem?
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:07:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 I don't actually use any of the GUI controls. It's just useful 
 to have vim in a window that I can resize

xterms can resize too! Though, sometimes the window resize signal gets lost. I resize the window while one program is running, then go back to bash and the readline editing is broken until i resize again. Aargh. But vim handles it quite well. Though gvim isn't bad, I used it for a while, I just like being able to use it with screen too.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Arjan <arjan ask.me> writes:
Windows:VisualStudio Eclipse VIM  Notepad++
*nix:  Eclipse VIM Kate Monodevelop
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 14:36:16 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 
 So I set up my MX to deliver
 all mail to my PC, and I check mail with ssh/mutt. Nowadays I can even
 do this from my Android phone, though the low resolution and lack of a
 real keyboard does make it rather awkward to use.
 

I once received notice about, investigated and fixed, a web server problem entirely by dual-wielding an Android and an iPhone while sitting in a McDonald's for a few minutes (it was admittedly a simple problem, and luckily I had already set up both with ssh keys for the server). I thought that was pretty damn cool, even though doing the same on my PC would have been much quicker and easier. It's no secret I'm not a fan of those devices, but their benefit is that they do serve as a shitty version of a Palm PDA...except with full internet access.
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained
by incompetence. -- Napoleon Bonaparte

I've been such a big believer in that quote for years. Never heard it associated with Napoleon though, I always just knew it as "Hanlon's Razor": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 23:30:55 +0200
"Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:
 
 I'm suprised that so few use an IDE. :D

I think IDE users have been avoiding D due to (perceived?) issues with D's IDE support. So those of us that do use D tend to be the ones who don't rely on IDEs. "Chicken and egg"
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Justin Whear <justin economicmodeling.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 18:06:50 -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 I don't actually use any of the GUI controls. It's just useful to have
 vim in a window that I can resize (you also get better color choices
 than in the shell).

Yeah, my .gvimrc is basically just turning off all the GUI elements, the very first thing I did when I started using it. I use gvim when working locally for only two reasons: full color support and resizing splits quickly with the mouse.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 12:09:35AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:45:06 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Xterm has a 256-color mode that can be used for subtler

You can do a palette swap in hardware text mode too (fiddling the vga palette registers, I think it is the same as in mode 13h but it's been a looooong time since I've played with that), the linux console in vga text mode (see man console_codes(4)), and in Windows console: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms686039%28v=vs.85%29.aspx Perhaps bad practice to change that stuff, at least not without changing it back when you're done, but it is doable. Actually, my biggest problem with linux is how terrible the operating system is compared to DOS and Windows. I'm not even kidding, the unix terminal debacle sucks (maybe good when you had various hardware, but it is weak next to what the PC hardware offers), the available system facilities suck (Win32 is plenty usable and reliably there! Even on linux, using a Windows .exe tends to work better than using a linux binary - exe's just work there thanks to wine, whereas linux binaries always have some incompatibility).

Really? The only time I've actually had trouble with linux binaries is when there's a problem with libc upgrades (the most disastrous one being the libc5 -> libc6 upgrade, as I remember it). On Windows, when installing stuff I used to always get messages like "this installer wants to overwrite the file C:\\windows\system\asdf1234.dll, proceed (y/n)?" -- which totally freaks me out. I mean, I don't even know what on earth that file is supposed to do, and to top it off it's often the same few files that every other installer and his neighbour's download utility wants to overwrite for no discernible reason. They don't call it "DLL hell" for no reason, I suppose. And then once I make the choice just by pure blind guessing, the installation just barges onward with no indication whatsoever as to whether it actually worked, or some subtle problem was introduced to the system. Needless to say, I find myself reformatting and reinstalling windows all the time, which I suspect is due to these kinds of dependency problems. (But TBH, the last time I touched windows in any serious way was almost 15 years ago, so none of the above may be true anymore.) Having said that, though, linux *is* more geared to building from source than anything else, so downloading random "linux" binaries tends to not work very well. Manually downloading binaries is a windows-centric concept, methinks. It works OK when there's only a small number of possible OS configurations in Windows (esp. with MS's obsession with backward-compatibility), but linux's customizability means you're dealing with an exponential number of mutually-incompatible OS configurations -- binary compatibility goes out the window right there. Building from source, OTOH, tends to work pretty well, if you can get the thing to compile at all. (Thanks to apt-get, this is relatively painless nowadays, once you figure out which libraries are needed... I remember the early days before apt was born. It was a nightmare chasing down all those package dependencies *transitively*, esp. when I had to use sneakernet to download packages from my school's network due to a 2400 baud internet connection at home -- impractical for downloading big source packages.) Nowadays, with people finally learning how to handle .so versioning and ABI compatibility properly, these kinds of problems are no longer a big issue for me, as long as I can build from source. Binary distribution is still a royal pain, though. IMO it *inherently* doesn't work very well in the linux ecosystem, which is definitely more favorable towards open source software.
 Eh I'm getting off topic.

Isn't this thread already [OT]? ;-) T -- Obviously, some things aren't very obvious.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Arjan <arjan ask.me> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:10:30 +0200, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx>  
wrote:

 Heh. Can you believe this is the first time I've heard of 'e', in spite
 of having used vim for more than a decade?  Here I've been using w
 and W and thinking they were good enough... I learned something new
 today.

Just to share: Bram Molenaar about '7 Habits For Effective Text Editing 2.0' http://youtu.be/eX9m3g5J-XA of course using vim. You might learn more than one thing ;-)
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Justin Whear <justin economicmodeling.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:09:35 +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 Actually, my biggest problem with linux is how terrible the operating
 system is compared to DOS and Windows. I'm not even kidding, the unix
 terminal debacle sucks (maybe good when you had various hardware, but it
 is weak next to what the PC hardware offers), the available system
 facilities suck (Win32 is plenty usable and reliably there! Even on
 linux, using a Windows .exe tends to work better than using a linux
 binary - exe's just work there thanks to wine, whereas linux binaries
 always have some incompatibility).
 
 Eh I'm getting off topic.

This is a distribution problem; I've stuck with Debian or Debian-based distros over the years and never had issues like this. I view package- management as vastly superior to the Windows solution which is to ship per-application DLLs. I'd much rather do "sudo apt-get install <package>" and have it cheerfully inform me that it only needs to install one or two dependencies because I already have all the other shared libraries.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:23:48 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 23:30:55 +0200
 "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:
 
 I'm suprised that so few use an IDE. :D

I think IDE users have been avoiding D due to (perceived?) issues with D's IDE support. So those of us that do use D tend to be the ones who don't rely on IDEs. "Chicken and egg"

Next time I should ask who use which OS. ;)
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 13 September 2013 20:48, Namespace <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try this
 evening VisualD.

vim -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:06:50PM -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Friday, September 13, 2013 14:58:48 H. S. Teoh wrote:

 I use vim (bare text mode, no GUI, so no gvim for me)

I don't actually use any of the GUI controls. It's just useful to have vim in a window that I can resize (you also get better color choices than in the shell).

I don't use color (the first thing I do on first installing Linux on a new machine is to edit .bashrc and turn of color in bash prompts and ls), so it's one less reason for me to need gvim. :) I also use ratpoison, which maximizes everything anyway, so I never need any resizing either (plus ratpoison makes the mouse almost redundant). So I guess I really don't need anything more than plain vanilla vim. :)
 for literally *everything*. Everything from system config files to
 coding to LaTeX for word-processing to scripted graphics processing
 (thanks to imagemagick) to povray scene files, there's almost
 nothing in my world that can't be accomplished by vim. :)
 
 Sometimes I wonder how the GUI-encumbered people get any work done
 at all, what with needing to constantly switch their hands between
 the keyboard and the rodent, wait for a 600MB application to load up
 200MB of eye-candy and paint the screen with 50 toolbar controls, 45
 of which that they never actually use, click through endless layers
 of nested menus just to perform a single operation, etc.. ;-)
 
 (OK, OK, so I'm a fossilized relic from the last ice age of '75,
 I'll stop the GUI-bashing now. :-P You may carry on.)

LOL. Yeah, the main reason that I don't use IDEs is the fact that they're essentially a glorified version of notepad as far as editing goes. They _do_ usually have better editing capabilities then the ever-so-pathetic notepad, but they can't do much of anything in comparison to the likes of vim or emacs.

I don't even consider a notepad a real "editor". Useful for doodling random notes to yourself, I suppose, in accordance with its name, but pretty much unusable for anything beyond that.
 So, I end up using (g)vim for everything. The features that an IDE has
 that vim doesn't typically just aren't worth it. e.g. if I'm stuck
 doing Windows programming, about the most that I even do with VS is
 use the debugger. I even build from the command line rather than open
 the IDE.

We really should improve D support in gdb (or whatever other debugger people like to use on Windows). I've mainly resorted to writeln debugging, and it's really quite embarrassing. Though, I think there's an unfair stigma against it -- I found that well-placed fprintf's (in C/C++) are surprisingly effective at tracking down hard-to-find bugs in code involving fork() and dynamically-loaded .so's, that gdb (or any other debugger) would require lots of tedious setup to even begin to debug properly. In an embedded environment, where it's not so easy to substitute system libraries or install the latest debugging scaffolding, printf debugging may well be on par with "real" debugging with a debugger, methinks.
 Vim's learning curve is quite nasty, but I definitely think that it
 was worth it.

Yeah, I hated vi and all its ilk for the longest time. I used to rant about the counterintuitivity of modal editors all the time on online discussion boards, until one day I steeled myself to actually learn it, and now I wouldn't use anything else. I like the way Justin Whear describes it: it's not so much a set of keyboard shortcuts for common editing operations, as a *language* for describing editing operations. A language requires much more effort to learn than a set of shortcuts, but in the end, it's far more expressive and powerful. T -- Question authority. Don't ask why, just do it.
Sep 13 2013
next sibling parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F6nke_Ludwig?= <sludwig outerproduct.org> writes:
Am 14.09.2013 10:40, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
 You're right that the most annoying thing
 about having a "real" debugger is the fact that you can't step
 backwards.

I've always wanted to try this: http://velvetpulse.com/2012/11/27/scribe-the-deterministic-transparent-record-replay-engine/ It looks extremely powerful
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 14.09.2013 19:30, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 02:25:43PM +0200, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 07:28:33 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
 wrote:
 Any time I use a debugger I get sooo sick of having to reset and hit
 "step" a million times (or muck around with conditional breakpoints,
 which never seem to be intuitive - *if* they even work at all) every
 single time I want to see (or remember) what happened *before*.  But
 with writeln - I already see the whole relevant trace at a glance,
 and all with exactly the same tools and interfaces I'm already using.

 Writeln debugging rocks my world.

Give me a way to writeln the callstack frames at a certain point, and I'll take that: until this, I still need a debugger for following the program flow.

I'm pretty sure this is possible with a little effort. In fact, this would be a game-changer to writeln debugging. I should take a look at the stack unwinding code in druntime sometime and see if I can knock something together that does this. One trick my coworkers like to use sometimes (with C/C++) is to insert an infinite loop into the program at the suspected problem spot, then at runtime when it reaches 99% CPU, kill -11 to force a segfault to generate a stack trace (we have a stacktrace generator hooked up to the signal handler). I've used that a couple o' times, and it's surprisingly effective, I must say. We found that sometimes this is the only approach that is effective, since the path to get to the problem spot may be completely non-trivial to reach from a debugger (may involve fork()'s, dynamically-loaded .so's, and event loops dispatches triggered by real-time network data that would be excruciatingly slow to step through manually in a debugger). Still, if there was a way to print a stacktrace *without* terminating the program, that would be an invaluable addition to our toolset.
 And no, adding a writeln everywhere you call that function is not a
 solution.

True, this is one of the weak points of writeln debugging. Though I usually start from the top-level, so generally by the time I get to a specific function I already know how it got there. OTOH, even displaying callstack may not help if your code is heavy on callbacks (or in D, delegates) invoked from event loops. The original context that registered the callback is long gone by the time the function actually runs, so the callstack only goes down to the event dispatcher, which is no help. T

So much work when one could just call the debugger from running code, http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/f408b4et.aspx at least on Windows. :) -- Paulo
Sep 14 2013
next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 14.09.2013 21:52, schrieb Artur Skawina:
 On 09/14/13 21:15, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 So much work when one could just call the debugger from running code,

 http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/f408b4et.aspx

 at least on Windows. :)

// version (x86|x86_64) enum __debugbreak = q{asm { "int $3"; }}; void main() { import std.stdio; auto a = 42; writeln(a); mixin (__debugbreak); writeln(a); }

Ah, should have tested on Linux before posting. I was under the impression you could not do an "int 3" from user space.
 ...

 DMD might support inline asm too, with a different syntax; never used it.

It does, Walter is very keen on it and contrary to C and C++, it is really part of the language's specification. -- Paulo
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 14.09.2013 23:55, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 09:15:35PM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 [...]
 So much work when one could just call the debugger from running code,

 http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/f408b4et.aspx

 at least on Windows. :)

Well, I haven't used Windows in any significant way for at least a decade, much less did any Windows development, so I think I'll go with Adam Ruppe's solution (which t0t4lly r0x0r5, btw). :-) T

Well, I used to do it as well, around 1994-99. :)
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Artur Skawina <art.08.09 gmail.com> writes:
On 09/14/13 21:15, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 So much work when one could just call the debugger from running code,
 
 http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/f408b4et.aspx
 
 at least on Windows. :)

// version (x86|x86_64) enum __debugbreak = q{asm { "int $3"; }}; void main() { import std.stdio; auto a = 42; writeln(a); mixin (__debugbreak); writeln(a); } $ gdc -O3 -g explbp.d -o explbp $ gdb ./explbp (gdb) run 42 Program received signal SIGTRAP, Trace/breakpoint trap. D main () at explbp.d:10 10 writeln(a); (gdb) bt #0 D main () at explbp.d:10 #1 0x00000000004082af in rt.dmain2._d_run_main.runMain (this=0x7fffffffe480) at ../../../../libphobos/libdruntime/rt/dmain2.d:620 #2 0x0000000000408a0f in rt.dmain2._d_run_main() (this=this entry=0x7fffffffe480, dg=...) at ../../../../libphobos/libdruntime/rt/dmain2.d:595 #3 0x0000000000408c30 in rt.dmain2._d_run_main.runAll (this=0x7fffffffe480) at ../../../../libphobos/libdruntime/rt/dmain2.d:630 #4 0x0000000000408a0f in rt.dmain2._d_run_main() (this=this entry=0x7fffffffe480, dg=...) at ../../../../libphobos/libdruntime/rt/dmain2.d:595 #5 0x0000000000408ba0 in _d_run_main (argc=1, argv=<optimized out>, mainFunc=<optimized out>) at ../../../../libphobos/libdruntime/rt/dmain2.d:639 #6 0x00007ffff762b662 in __libc_start_main (main=0x408bd0 <main>, argc=1, ubp_av=0x7fffffffe5c8, init=<optimized out>, fini=<optimized out>, rtld_fini=<optimized out>, stack_end=0x7fffffffe5b8) at libc-start.c:225 #7 0x0000000000403055 in _start () at ../sysdeps/x86_64/start.S:123 (gdb) p a $1 = 42 (gdb) c Continuing. 42 [Inferior 1 (process 32095) exited normally] (gdb) q DMD might support inline asm too, with a different syntax; never used it. artur
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-15 02:09, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Assert? That doesn't let you trace the flow. I use this:

 void trace(string file=__FILE__, size_t line=__LINE__)(string
 msg="trace") {
          writefln("%s(%s): %s", file, line, msg);
          stdout.flush();
 }

If you use runtime arguments you'll avoid template bloat: void trace(string msg="trace", string file=__FILE__, size_t line=__LINE__) -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-15 12:40, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Cool, I didn't know __FILE__/__LINE__ worked as default runtime args.
 IIRC, they didn't used to (but maybe that was just in D1 where they
 didn't work as default template args either).

I also keep forgetting that. First it only worked for template arguments. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling parent =?UTF-8?B?U8O2bmtlIEx1ZHdpZw==?= <sludwig outerproduct.org> writes:
Am 14.09.2013 22:20, schrieb Paolo Invernizzi:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 17:34:27 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
 wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 12:25:44 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi
 wrote:
 Give me a way to writeln the callstack frames at a certain

Challenge accepted: import std.stdio; string getStackTrace() { import core.runtime; version(Posix) { // druntime cuts out the first few functions on the trace as they are internal // so we'll make some dummy functions here so our actual info doesn't get cut Throwable.TraceInfo f5() { return defaultTraceHandler(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f4() { return f5(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f3() { return f4(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f2() { return f3(); } auto stuff = f2(); } else { auto stuff = defaultTraceHandler(); } return stuff.toString(); } void foo() { writeln("on foo"); bar(); } void bar() { writeln("on bar"); omg(); } void omg() { writeln("on omg"); writeln(getStackTrace()); } void main() { omg(); writeln("\n****\n"); foo(); }

O_o Adam, this is *really* an unexpected gift! I suggest to add this example in the core.runtime DDoc at least! - Paolo

Even better would be to promote the underlying function for "defaultTraceHandler" to be public and add an argument (size_t nskip = 0) to make it generally useful without those ugly artificial stack frames. I mean don't get me wrong, I've used that same hack myself a few weeks ago, but it doesn't really make for a premium API ;)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:09:36 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 Even on linux, using a Windows .exe tends to work better than 
 using a linux binary - exe's just work there thanks to wine, 
 whereas linux binaries always have some incompatibility).

As others have mentioned, this is not how linux operates really. In my experience almost everyone either uses a package manager (almost everything) or builds from source (bleeding edge) Downloading executables from peoples websites is definitely a window mindset.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 12:37:51AM +0200, Namespace wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:23:48 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 23:30:55 +0200
"Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:
I'm suprised that so few use an IDE. :D

I think IDE users have been avoiding D due to (perceived?) issues with D's IDE support. So those of us that do use D tend to be the ones who don't rely on IDEs. "Chicken and egg"

Next time I should ask who use which OS. ;)

I started using Linux around 1996 or so. Never looked back since. T -- It is not the employer who pays the wages. Employers only handle the money. It is the customer who pays the wages. -- Henry Ford
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 13 September 2013 23:32, Andrei Alexandrescu
<SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:
 On 9/13/13 3:09 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 Actually, my biggest problem with linux is how terrible the operating
 system is compared to DOS and Windows. I'm not even kidding, the unix
 terminal debacle sucks (maybe good when you had various hardware, but it
 is weak next to what the PC hardware offers), the available system
 facilities suck (Win32 is plenty usable and reliably there! Even on
 linux, using a Windows .exe tends to work better than using a linux
 binary - exe's just work there thanks to wine, whereas linux binaries
 always have some incompatibility).

Sure... wait, what? It's like I woke up and it's backward day :o). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backwards_(Red_Dwarf_episode)

I too am confused. I'd say it is the complete opposite too (in my experience :-) -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Peter Williams <pwil3058 bigpond.net.au> writes:
Geany mainly on Linux but also on Windows (but not much as I only fix 
Windows specific issues in my code on Windows and do most of my work on 
Linux).  I use my own PyGTK GUI wrapper for git for source management.

Peter
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Piotr Szturmaj <bncrbme jadamspam.pl> writes:
On 13.09.2013 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try
 this evening VisualD.

Real Programmers magnetize programs directly on a HDD.
Sep 13 2013
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/13/13 4:43 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 On 14 September 2013 00:39, Piotr Szturmaj <bncrbme jadamspam.pl> wrote:
 On 13.09.2013 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try
 this evening VisualD.

Real Programmers magnetize programs directly on a HDD.

Excuse me, but /real/ programmers use Butterflies.

For the few souls who don't yet... http://xkcd.com/378/ Andrei
Sep 13 2013
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/13/2013 8:48 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 On 9/13/13 4:43 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 On 14 September 2013 00:39, Piotr Szturmaj <bncrbme jadamspam.pl> wrote:
 On 13.09.2013 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try
 this evening VisualD.

Real Programmers magnetize programs directly on a HDD.

Excuse me, but /real/ programmers use Butterflies.

For the few souls who don't yet... http://xkcd.com/378/

I've used punch cards and paper tape. But I refused to use paddle switches.
Sep 13 2013
parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 9/14/2013 1:28 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
 On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 21:52 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
 On 9/13/2013 8:48 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 For the few souls who don't yet... http://xkcd.com/378/


Emacs FTW.
 I've used punch cards and paper tape. But I refused to use paddle switches.

So how did you get the paper tape or punch card loader in without first using the paddle switches? No paddle switch manipulation, no booted computer. :-)

The computer was back in the machine room, and the operators booted it. I wasn't allowed back there. When I programmed single board computers, I blew the boot program into eproms. When I finally did get my own PDP-11, the few instructions needed to initiate the boot were hardwired into the CPU.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 14 September 2013 00:39, Piotr Szturmaj <bncrbme jadamspam.pl> wrote:
 On 13.09.2013 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try
 this evening VisualD.

Real Programmers magnetize programs directly on a HDD.

Excuse me, but /real/ programmers use Butterflies. -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Friday, September 13, 2013 23:55:53 Iain Buclaw wrote:
 On 13 September 2013 23:32, Andrei Alexandrescu
 
 <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:
 On 9/13/13 3:09 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 Actually, my biggest problem with linux is how terrible the operating
 system is compared to DOS and Windows. I'm not even kidding, the unix
 terminal debacle sucks (maybe good when you had various hardware, but it
 is weak next to what the PC hardware offers), the available system
 facilities suck (Win32 is plenty usable and reliably there! Even on
 linux, using a Windows .exe tends to work better than using a linux
 binary - exe's just work there thanks to wine, whereas linux binaries
 always have some incompatibility).

Sure... wait, what? It's like I woke up and it's backward day :o). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backwards_(Red_Dwarf_episode)

I too am confused. I'd say it is the complete opposite too (in my experience :-)

I guess that it's a matter of perspective. Personally, I find the Windows/DOS shell to be completely unusable and use git-bash when I'm forced to use Windows. Windows definitely has some things going for it (e.g. its graphics engine creams the horror that is X.org IMHO), but on the whole, I find that Linux is just way better for a power user like myself. Windows doesn't even come close to cutting it. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Friday, September 13, 2013 15:48:55 H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:06:50PM -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 Vim's learning curve is quite nasty, but I definitely think that it
 was worth it.

[...] Yeah, I hated vi and all its ilk for the longest time. I used to rant about the counterintuitivity of modal editors all the time on online discussion boards, until one day I steeled myself to actually learn it, and now I wouldn't use anything else. I like the way Justin Whear describes it: it's not so much a set of keyboard shortcuts for common editing operations, as a *language* for describing editing operations. A language requires much more effort to learn than a set of shortcuts, but in the end, it's far more expressive and powerful.

I don't think that it was ever described quite that way to me, but the co- worker/mentor I had who was really into vim and got me to learn it did explain the importance of learning each of the individual commands so that you could then combine them rather than learning things like the fact that dd deleted a line or that yy copied an entire line. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Friday, September 13, 2013 22:24:19 Justin Whear wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 18:06:50 -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 I don't actually use any of the GUI controls. It's just useful to have
 vim in a window that I can resize (you also get better color choices
 than in the shell).

Yeah, my .gvimrc is basically just turning off all the GUI elements, the very first thing I did when I started using it..

I should try that. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Gary Willoughby" <dev nomad.so> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

i use vim or gVim depending where i am.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:32:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
 Sure... wait, what?

Download a random binary off the internet. Odds are, if it is an exe, it will work. Even if you're on linux, you can run it with wine. If it is a linux binary, good luck. Even a relatively simple program like dmd can't be relied upon: on the CentOS box at one of my jobs, I had to build from source due to a libc incompatibility. And if it is a gui program, whew, all bets are off! I even have programs on my desktop that worked last year, and segfault now. Apparently an unrelated update had an ABI incompatibility in gtk. Gimp still works (and works quite well), but qemu's new gtk gui segfaults, a video game emulator I have runs but the menu all of a sudden overlaps the game video, and abiword refuses to start. These aren't even off the internet, these are things I compiled myself less than two years ago! Contrast to Windows, where programs I wrote while using win98 still tend to work. Then, get into features. Contrast the Windows support with the linux support in my terminal.d https://github.com/adamdruppe/misc-stuff-including-D-programming-language-web-stuff/blob/master/terminal.d The first several *hundred* lines are dealing with random incompatibilities in unix terminals, from keys sending different sequences (and, of course, the infamous nonsense in differentiating the user pressing the esc key from something like F1 or another input escape sequence) to dealing with random output rules. The KeyRelease event is never fired there, and the KeyPress for various keys doesn't actually work either, despite the actual PC hardware sending those codes. And there's features not present either: determining the current color so you can get better contrast. Gotta depend on the user setting an environment variable. (You can't even use palette entry #3 and expect dark or light yellow depending on the bg which adjusts the whole system palette. Nope, it will happily put light yellow on a white background and you can't tell if it is doing that.) Oh, and the fad of semi-transparent terminal windows. Please, give me a break. But that's user silliness, not the OS, so I'll forgive it. Anyway, you also can't resize the cursor well, say to indicate insert vs overstrike mode. The PC hardware supports it.... but Linux assumes you're on a random glass terminal, and accessing the actual capabilities of PC hardware is clunky at best. (You could spin this as a benefit, "look, cross-hardware compatibility!" And that's great, it really is, but it could be done so much better with graceful degradation techniques, not saying "sorry PC users, you can't do that".) And drawing, oh my. Long story short, coming from DOS or Windows to the glorious land of various buggy, incompatible vt100 emulators is such a shock. Wanna talk about audio or GUIs, whether high performance or just asking for a consistent user experience to grab some basic data? Prepare to descend directly into hell, do not pass go, do not collect $200. PS I've used exclusively Linux on my desktop for about a decade now. I like a *lot* about it, especially now that I have so many hacked up programs (custom taskbar, slightly modified Blackbox window manager, a hotkey listener, my own libraries, etc. etc. etc.). But at the same time, using it for all this time after having so much fun in the DOS+Windows world has made me see a lot of faults. And many of them have gotten worse - what the hell is PulseAudio anyway?
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:34:44 UTC, Justin Whear wrote:
 This is a distribution problem; I've stuck with Debian or 
 Debian-based distros over the years and never had issues like 
 this.

I've used them too... ever have a proprietary requirement that only works with, say, php 5.2, but only php 5.1 is available in the repo? Or a custom built thing the company relies upon.... but no longer has the source, and their old server just died? Or, has the source, but it only compiles with one specific setup anyway. I've had to deal with stuff like this several times, and the package manager fights me every step of the way. Or, on my home computer, someone wrote something cool.... but of course they don't offer a package for my system. (At home, I use Slackware.) So it is time to build from source. Great, but then it is time to track down a hundred tiny libraries (seriously, a 10 kb library, why didn't you just include that in your own source?), of course matching the version too. What a hassle! Hence my first comment: I prefer to just grab the Windows version and run it in wine. That usually just works.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:29:28 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 The only time I've actually had trouble with linux binaries is 
 when there's a problem with libc upgrades

The biggest offender for my home computer is gtk and glib. libc can be painful too - especially with work computers that stick to a particular version in the name of stability (I don't blame them, updating software is an exercise in pain. Even when they don't outright break things, so often they've changed it, now it sucks.). But all those glib whatevers really kill me.
 On Windows, when
 installing stuff I used to always get messages like "this 
 installer

That's not such a problem anymore since Vista. The system does some magic rewrites so those naughty programs think they are writing to system folders, but are actually pretty isolated. Still worries me on Linux though! "just run sudo make install", and trust you not to do anything wrong? Nope! On both systems, I don't like installing programs. Whenever I can, I like to keep the application in its own folder and run it as my limited user account only (e.g., unzip dmd.zip, run ./dmd2/linux/bin32/dmd. it just worked! and any versions can live side by side! and it didn't overwrite anything else another program might rely on! WIN!)
 Having said that, though, linux *is* more geared to building 
 from source than anything else

That'd be great if you didn't have to recreate the original author's environment on your computer, or wait seemingly forever for ./configure to run, then wait forever again for make to run, just to see if the program even does what you want it to do. This is why my D programs usually just have a few files you can drop in. So I say "get my simpledisplay.d and color.d" and you don't have to install it, you don't have to download the same libraries I have, you just grab those two files and dmd yourapp.d simpledisplay.d color.d and boom, it *should* work. While I do have some other libs installed, various C headers and so forth, I think it is unreasonable to ask you, my user, to have all that too. If modularity and DRY are at odds, I prefer to err on the side of fewer dependencies.
 but linux's customizability means

eh to an extent yes, but my custom window manager shouldn't mean your notepad program doesn't work. Maybe some special features won't be the same, but my preference in one location shouldn't break core functionality in another. There is a reasonable common denominator here - people don't customize their ELF loaders (much). They don't hack their kernels so the syscall numbers don't match. Those things actually work, so nobody really cares. Why do people use other sound servers/modules or gui libraries? Because the default is broken. Not because they disagree, but because it is *broken*. So then everyone does their own fixes to work around it... and that leads to pain. So it isn't end user customizability that cause the problem. It is mid-user patching a broken core.
 Isn't this thread already [OT]? ;-)

yeah but it wasn't meant to be a rant thread! oh well.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Mike Parker <aldacron gmail.com> writes:
On 9/14/2013 4:48 AM, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try
 this evening VisualD.

Sublime 3
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Kapps" <opantm2+spam gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

I find Mono-D to be very good now-a-days, particularly in regards to editing. There are some very annoying bugs like sometimes local variables not being detected, and numbers triggering code completion (the latter in particular *really* annoys me), but overall I find it to be a really nice editor. Comparing VisualD to Mono-D, I'd say Mono-D feels more C#-like and Visual D feels more C++-like. I haven't had a chance to try Visual D in a while though, since I'm using Linux at the moment. For simple edits, I agree, Sublime Text is excellent. I replaced Notepad++ with it, and it's quite a bit nicer. It also supports high DPI natively with Sublime Text 3, so that's a nice plus on a 2880x1800 laptop.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Brad Anderson" <eco gnuk.net> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 23:57:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 On Friday, September 13, 2013 22:24:19 Justin Whear wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 18:06:50 -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 I don't actually use any of the GUI controls. It's just 
 useful to have
 vim in a window that I can resize (you also get better color 
 choices
 than in the shell).

Yeah, my .gvimrc is basically just turning off all the GUI elements, the very first thing I did when I started using it..

I should try that. - Jonathan M Davis

if has("gui_running") set guioptions-=m " hide menu set guioptions-=T " hide toolbar endif Is what I do. Nice and clean.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "dusr" <dusr d.usr> writes:
SciTE
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Sean Kelly <sean invisibleduck.org> writes:
On Sep 13, 2013, at 6:23 PM, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> =
wrote:

 On 9/13/2013 5:39 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 And drawing, oh my. Long story short, coming from DOS or Windows to =


 land of various buggy, incompatible vt100 emulators is such a shock.

Yeah, I've thought about taking the tty/kbd code from ME and making a =

abstracted away. Is nurses not sufficient? I've only used it for making roguelikes, but = it made working with a text terminal quite easy.=
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Jesse Phillips" <Jesse.K.Phillips+D gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

gvim I installed Visual-D once, but haven't used it.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--047d7b2e153bb4079d04e64f1e9b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 14, 2013 1:40 AM, "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:32:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 Sure... wait, what?

Download a random binary off the internet. Odds are, if it is an exe, it

 If it is a linux binary, good luck. Even a relatively simple program like

build from source due to a libc incompatibility.
 And if it is a gui program, whew, all bets are off! I even have programs

unrelated update had an ABI incompatibility in gtk. Gimp still works (and works quite well), but qemu's new gtk gui segfaults, a video game emulator I have runs but the menu all of a sudden overlaps the game video, and abiword refuses to start.
 These aren't even off the internet, these are things I compiled myself


So then recompile after you do a distribution upgrade. Assuming you still have the original code kicking round. Even then GIMP and QEMU are readily available through most Linux distribution repositories. Stuck on some company version of binary software? Hate to be someone who gets stuck in that situation. But then I wouldn't reluctantly accept the blobs either.
 Then, get into features. Contrast the Windows support with the linux



I'll be sure to look, but one bad thing doesn't mean everything's bad (heck, for each bad thing you can say about one OS, there is some equally bad thing to say about the other).
 Wanna talk about audio or GUIs, whether high performance or just asking

descend directly into hell, do not pass go, do not collect $200.

There's a lot the that does good - such as because of close bindings to ATK, all GTK applications are accessible for all, but when you also give people the choice to make their own custom widgets or place input boxes/labels in ridiculous places, then accessibilty goes downhill quickly. Windows is pretty Stonehenge when it comes to accessibility too, so no cookies to either side.
 But at the same time, using it for all this time after having so much fun

have gotten worse - what the hell is PulseAudio anyway? Essentially pulse is what Mir or Wayland will be to X in probably a year or two. It's a layer that talks to and interacts with ALSA, SDL, JACK, etc applications and allows you to centrally manage them despite competing incompatibility between the libraries - oh, and it does soft mixing for hardware that is incapable of processing more than one sound at once - if you remember the days when you'd be listening to music but couldn't hear any sounds from sauerbraten, or whatever Linux games you were into. :) Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --047d7b2e153bb4079d04e64f1e9b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 14, 2013 1:40 AM, &quot;Adam D. Ruppe&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:de= structionator gmail.com">destructionator gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:32:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrot= e:<br> &gt;&gt;<br> &gt;&gt; Sure... wait, what?<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; Download a random binary off the internet. Odds are, if it is an exe, = it will work. Even if you&#39;re on linux, you can run it with wine.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; If it is a linux binary, good luck. Even a relatively simple program l= ike dmd can&#39;t be relied upon: on the CentOS box at one of my jobs, I ha= d to build from source due to a libc incompatibility.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; And if it is a gui program, whew, all bets are off! I even have progra= ms on my desktop that worked last year, and segfault now. Apparently an unr= elated update had an ABI incompatibility in gtk. Gimp still works (and work= s quite well), but qemu&#39;s new gtk gui segfaults, a video game emulator = I have runs but the menu all of a sudden overlaps the game video, and abiwo= rd refuses to start.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; These aren&#39;t even off the internet, these are things I compiled my= self less than two years ago!<br> &gt;<br> &gt;</p> <p>So then recompile after you do a distribution upgrade.=A0 Assuming you s= till have the original code kicking round.=A0 Even then GIMP and QEMU are r= eadily available through most Linux distribution repositories.=A0 Stuck on = some company version of binary software? Hate to be someone who gets stuck = in that situation. But then I wouldn&#39;t reluctantly accept the blobs eit= her.<br> </p> <p>&gt;<br> &gt; Then, get into features. Contrast the Windows support with the linux s= upport in my terminal.d<br> &gt; <a href=3D"https://github.com/adamdruppe/misc-stuff-including-D-progra= mming-language-web-stuff/blob/master/terminal.d">https://github.com/adamdru= ppe/misc-stuff-including-D-programming-language-web-stuff/blob/master/termi= nal.d</a><br> &gt;</p> <p>I&#39;ll be sure to look, but one bad thing doesn&#39;t mean everything&= #39;s bad (heck, for each bad thing you can say about one OS, there is some= equally bad thing to say about the other).</p> <p>&gt;<br> &gt; Wanna talk about audio or GUIs, whether high performance or just askin= g for a consistent user experience to grab some basic data? Prepare to desc= end directly into hell, do not pass go, do not collect $200.<br> &gt;</p> <p>There&#39;s a lot the that does good - such as because of close bindings= to ATK, all GTK applications are accessible for all, but when you also giv= e people the choice to make their own custom widgets or place input boxes/l= abels in ridiculous places, then=A0 accessibilty goes downhill quickly.=A0 = Windows is pretty Stonehenge when it comes to accessibility too, so no cook= ies to either side.</p> <p>&gt;<br> &gt; But at the same time, using it for all this time after having so much = fun in the DOS+Windows world has made me see a lot of faults. And many of t= hem have gotten worse - what the hell is PulseAudio anyway?</p> <p>Essentially pulse is what Mir or Wayland will be to X in probably a year= or two.=A0 It&#39;s a layer that talks to and interacts with ALSA, SDL, JA= CK, etc applications and allows you to centrally manage them despite compet= ing incompatibility between the libraries - oh, and it does soft mixing for= hardware that is incapable of processing more than one sound at once - if = you remember the days when you&#39;d be listening to music but couldn&#39;t= hear any sounds from sauerbraten, or whatever Linux games you were into.= =A0 :)</p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;</p> --047d7b2e153bb4079d04e64f1e9b--
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--001a11c1efe44cd95b04e64f2994
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 14, 2013 1:40 AM, "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:32:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 Sure... wait, what?

Download a random binary off the internet. Odds are, if it is an exe, it


This is just not the right mindset of using your system. Regardless of what OS you use. Unless you enjoy spending hours on end removing viruses from your system. :) Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --001a11c1efe44cd95b04e64f2994 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 14, 2013 1:40 AM, &quot;Adam D. Ruppe&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:de= structionator gmail.com">destructionator gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:32:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrot= e:<br> &gt;&gt;<br> &gt;&gt; Sure... wait, what?<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; Download a random binary off the internet. Odds are, if it is an exe, = it will work. Even if you&#39;re on linux, you can run it with wine.<br> &gt;</p> <p>This is just not the right mindset of using your system. Regardless of w= hat OS you use.=A0 Unless you enjoy spending hours on end removing viruses = from your system. :)</p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;</p> --001a11c1efe44cd95b04e64f2994--
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

Use to go for gedit (for D) but recent changes has made it really frustrating to use (like auto pasting in the search field, even I really want to paste, I end up doing it twice, one automagically and one automanually, and fuck up everything). I use vim more since I've written my own terminal and can have a set of shortcut that make sense with shortcut outside the terminal (you know, ctrl C/V thing kind of wizardry that we still succeed to fuck up in 2013). Also considering buying a sublimetext license. It isn't that expensive and the soft is pretty good. I use it for work and really like it. I usually don't heavy weaponry like eclipse/visual studio/whatever, unless they can provide significant benefits. I use this kind of tool for java for instance (eclipse or IntelliJ) but do not for C++ or scripting languages.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 02:59:49 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 Unless you enjoy spending hours on end removing viruses from 
 your system. :)

Meh, do you actually review the source of everything you compile? I betcha if I made a makefile install: root_this_box actually_install I could pwn hundreds of linux boxes before the many eyes even took a look at it. (except i used spaces there instead of tabs. Thwarted by make's silly syntax once again!)
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 02:56:52 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 So then recompile after you do a distribution upgrade.

Of course there's ways around it, but talk about an enormous hassle.
 I'll be sure to look, but one bad thing doesn't mean 
 everything's bad

Like I said, I've been a Linux user for a long time, and that's by choice! But I still envy a lot of what Windows gets right and still long for the good old days of DOS where it was just you, the hardware, and a little tiny helper library that was there if you needed it.
 if you remember the days when you'd be listening to music but 
 couldn't hear any sounds from sauerbraten

Actually, that's still the way things are on my system (there is the alsa stuff, but the OSS emulation actually works better. Get that.).... and over the years, I've come to see it as a feature! See, I would keep one program running just to thwart random Flash crap from spewing noise. Now I use noscript, but still I've come to like locking the speakers with another program.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "dusr" <dusr d.usr> writes:
 Like I said, I've been a Linux user for a long time, and that's 
 by choice! But I still envy a lot of what Windows gets right 
 and still long for the good old days of DOS where it was just 
 you, the hardware, and a little tiny helper library that was 
 there if you needed it.

I've used debian from woody to squeeze, then I moved back to windows7. Windows is better.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Olivier Pisano" <olivier.pisano laposte.net> writes:
JEdit (seems I am the only one) and Visual D.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Saturday, September 14, 2013 06:56:10 Paulo Pinto wrote:
 Am 14.09.2013 00:06, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
 .... The features that an IDE has that
 vim doesn't typically just aren't worth it. e.g. if I'm stuck doing
 Windows
 programming, about the most that I even do with VS is use the debugger. I
 even build from the command line rather than open the IDE.
 
 Vim's learning curve is quite nasty, but I definitely think that it was
 worth it.
 
 - Jonathan M Davis

You mean things like: - Semantic refactoring - WYSIWYG design of user interfaces - code navigation, even across binary modules (call graph, derived class, overridden methods, call sites, ...) - graphical representation of code relationships - UML design - visual XML tooling - background compilation showing where there are issues - background static analysis while coding - code completation with documentation popups - integrate source code control with task management software to track code changes to project tasks - map failed unit tests to code lines - ...

I honestly find almost all of that to be useless or nearly so. The only one that I'd actually be much interested in would be better code navigation (particularly the ability to hop to the definition of a function). And having poor code editing capabilities would hamper me quite a bit. So, for me, vim wins hands down. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 15:28:03 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 
 On Windows, when
 installing stuff I used to always get messages like "this installer
 wants to overwrite the file C:\\windows\system\asdf1234.dll, proceed
 (y/n)?" -- which totally freaks me out.

I use windows basically every day, and I haven't seen that happen since the 90's.
 
 Building from source, OTOH, tends to work pretty well, if you can get
 the thing to compile at all. (Thanks to apt-get, this is relatively
 painless nowadays, once you figure out which libraries are needed...

That last part is the real problem though. Typing "wget http://blahblah && unzip blahblah && cd blahblah && ./configure && make && make install" may be easy(-ish), but not when you're collecting all the libs (or worse: non-lib dependencies, which then leads you into recursion), and the right versions of all, until the sllloooowwww ./configure or make process finally quits bitching about shit. (And why the freak do I need to re-./configure for every single program that needs compiled? Shouldn't something in autotools already *know* my system details and not have to re-detect *everything* every single time? "Checking X...", "Checking Y...", "Is Z sane..."...? Why? Every other damn autotools-based project *already* checked those every time I compiled them! It's like opening my car door twenty thousand times to make sure "Yup...it's still a car!". If certain changes might go unnoticed then fine, give me a way to force a re-check if really needed.) When I discover I need to build a linux program from source and can't just apt-get it or something, I usually just turn away and look for something else. Discovering an alternate program that *is* in the repo is faster and easier than playing "dependency scavenger hunt". Before tools like apt-get/yum came around, I had actually sworn off Linux entirely, largely because of those sorts of problems (which were only *slightly* less painful with rpm/deb).
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 06:37:49 +0200
"dusr" <dusr d.usr> wrote:

 Like I said, I've been a Linux user for a long time, and that's 
 by choice! But I still envy a lot of what Windows gets right 
 and still long for the good old days of DOS where it was just 
 you, the hardware, and a little tiny helper library that was 
 there if you needed it.

I've used debian from woody to squeeze, then I moved back to windows7. Windows is better.

Heh, I'm sort of the opposite. I've been using Windows from 3.11 through 7, and from Vista onward I've started to really hate Windows more and more (If I wanted to be running a Mac, I'd have gotten a Mac, not two versions of "New Windows: Apple-Envy Edition" followed by "Microsoft UI-Of-The-Month Club"). Meanwhile, I've been using Linux more and more for testing and servers, and I'm looking at switching my main OS over to...probably Debian 7, with wine and VirtualBox for the occasional things that don't come in Linux flavor. I just wish I could get a Linux file manager I liked.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 05:54:10 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 15:28:03 -0700
 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 
 On Windows, when
 installing stuff I used to always get messages like "this 
 installer
 wants to overwrite the file C:\\windows\system\asdf1234.dll, 
 proceed
 (y/n)?" -- which totally freaks me out.

I use windows basically every day, and I haven't seen that happen since the 90's.

1
 
 Building from source, OTOH, tends to work pretty well, if you 
 can get
 the thing to compile at all. (Thanks to apt-get, this is 
 relatively
 painless nowadays, once you figure out which libraries are 
 needed...

That last part is the real problem though. Typing "wget http://blahblah && unzip blahblah && cd blahblah && ./configure && make && make install" may be easy(-ish), but not when you're collecting all the libs (or worse: non-lib dependencies, which then leads you into recursion), and the right versions of all, until the sllloooowwww ./configure or make process finally quits bitching about shit.

2 2 is just as true as 1.
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 20:49:03 -0700
Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:

 On 9/13/13 5:39 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:32:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
 wrote:
 Sure... wait, what?

Download a random binary off the internet.

Nope :o).

Meh, all the hip blackhats are doing browser drive-by exploits, session hijacking and specially-corrupted-data exploits. Trojans and exe-infection is, like, soooo 90's, dude. But more seriously though, I run exes off the net all the time and I haven't dealt with those problems on my own Win computers in probably a decade. It just takes some common sense. Meanwhile, I've been shanghai'ed into "fix my computer!" duty from my Mom, my sister and my Dad all within the last two years - and they barely even know what a "program" or a "file" is, let alone how to download one and run it. (Seriously, I've watched both my parents on their computers - there's no freaking way those two would have been capable of downloading and running an installer even if the site gave dumbed-down "assume the user sets their coffee in the CD tray" instructions.)
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 22:15:06 -0700
Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:

 On Saturday, September 14, 2013 06:56:10 Paulo Pinto wrote:
 Am 14.09.2013 00:06, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
 .... The features that an IDE has that
 vim doesn't typically just aren't worth it. e.g. if I'm stuck
 doing Windows
 programming, about the most that I even do with VS is use the
 debugger. I even build from the command line rather than open the
 IDE.
 
 Vim's learning curve is quite nasty, but I definitely think that
 it was worth it.
 
 - Jonathan M Davis

You mean things like: - Semantic refactoring - WYSIWYG design of user interfaces - code navigation, even across binary modules (call graph, derived class, overridden methods, call sites, ...) - graphical representation of code relationships - UML design - visual XML tooling - background compilation showing where there are issues - background static analysis while coding - code completation with documentation popups - integrate source code control with task management software to track code changes to project tasks - map failed unit tests to code lines - ...


I find most of that stuff to be "nice, but not that big a deal" (and a few I just plain don't care at all). I used to be a big IDE guy, but I've done enough development on various immature platforms and ecosystems that I can get by just fine as long as I have: - Basic editing that's solid, fast, robust - Highlighting - CLI compiler I've had to debug things using as little as one LED. So printf debugging is perfectly comfortable to me, and I've gotten to the point where I even find it preferable to a full debugger in many cases. The rest is just icing (or gravy if you prefer).
 
 I honestly find almost all of that to be useless or nearly so. The
 only one that I'd actually be much interested in would be better code
 navigation (particularly the ability to hop to the definition of a
 function). And having poor code editing capabilities would hamper me
 quite a bit. So, for me, vim wins hands down.
 

Yea, the basics of code editing are the real #1 thing. If I can't "be one with the cursor and text-edit control", so to speak, then no amount of extra features can make up for it. (Of course, for me that means *not* vi, although I just haven't cared enough to get through the learning curve - but that's just me.)
Sep 13 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 06:35:05 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 20:49:03 -0700
 Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:

 On 9/13/13 5:39 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:32:30 UTC, Andrei 
 Alexandrescu
 wrote:
 Sure... wait, what?

Download a random binary off the internet.

Nope :o).

Meh, all the hip blackhats are doing browser drive-by exploits, session hijacking and specially-corrupted-data exploits. Trojans and exe-infection is, like, soooo 90's, dude. But more seriously though, I run exes off the net all the time and I haven't dealt with those problems on my own Win computers in probably a decade.

Because virus nowaday aren't there to destroy your computer, but to make it participate in botnet. Being as discrete as possible is the goal. And probably also because you use trusted sources + a bit of luck.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 15:48:55 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 
 LOL. Yeah, the main reason that I don't use IDEs is the fact that
 they're essentially a glorified version of notepad as far as editing
 goes. They _do_ usually have better editing capabilities then the
 ever-so-pathetic notepad, but they can't do much of anything in
 comparison to the likes of vim or emacs. 

I don't even consider a notepad a real "editor". Useful for doodling random notes to yourself, I suppose, in accordance with its name, but pretty much unusable for anything beyond that.

Yea, notepad has *not* held up well. It's pretty awful. I occasionally use it to remove formatting from text I'm copy-pasting, and that's about it. Even for basic "jotting down notes" I've switched from notepad over to my fast-loading code-editor (Programmer's Notepad 2) or OpenOffice if I want spellcheck (it's slow to load, but I usually keep a blank instance open just in case - hey, it's still far less of a resource drain than any web browser!).
 
 So, I end up using (g)vim for everything. The features that an IDE
 has that vim doesn't typically just aren't worth it. e.g. if I'm
 stuck doing Windows programming, about the most that I even do with
 VS is use the debugger. I even build from the command line rather
 than open the IDE.

We really should improve D support in gdb (or whatever other debugger people like to use on Windows). I've mainly resorted to writeln debugging, and it's really quite embarrassing. Though, I think there's an unfair stigma against it -- I found that well-placed fprintf's (in C/C++) are surprisingly effective at tracking down hard-to-find bugs in code involving fork() and dynamically-loaded .so's, that gdb (or any other debugger) would require lots of tedious setup to even begin to debug properly. In an embedded environment, where it's not so easy to substitute system libraries or install the latest debugging scaffolding, printf debugging may well be on par with "real" debugging with a debugger, methinks.

I love writeln debugging. I don't have to boot it up, configure it, learn about or task-switch my mind over to any new interface, or actively shy away from any opportunities that don't come with a fully-mature debugger (or wind up with my arms tied when I'm in the debugger habit and don't have a debugger available for whatever reason - in my experience, debuggers are reliance-forming drugs). But the *best* thing of all with writeln debugging: Being able to examine the entire relevant execution forwards *and* backwards in time, all at a glance, with zero "stepping". Total win. Any time I use a debugger I get sooo sick of having to reset and hit "step" a million times (or muck around with conditional breakpoints, which never seem to be intuitive - *if* they even work at all) every single time I want to see (or remember) what happened *before*. But with writeln - I already see the whole relevant trace at a glance, and all with exactly the same tools and interfaces I'm already using. Writeln debugging rocks my world.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 02:42:13AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:34:44 UTC, Justin Whear wrote:
This is a distribution problem; I've stuck with Debian or
Debian-based distros over the years and never had issues like
this.

I've used them too... ever have a proprietary requirement that only works with, say, php 5.2, but only php 5.1 is available in the repo? Or a custom built thing the company relies upon.... but no longer has the source, and their old server just died? Or, has the source, but it only compiles with one specific setup anyway. I've had to deal with stuff like this several times, and the package manager fights me every step of the way.

When I custom-install stuff, I usually put it in /usr/local/*, or even give it a dedicated home in /home (though usually just /usr/src/$pkgname/install or some such), away from the package manager managed stuff. It tends to work far better that way. Fighting with the package manager never ends well, as does installing external files into directories managed by the package manager. Almost all modern sources come with PREFIX configurability -- those that don't tend to be so fundamentally b0rken anyway that I don't even bother with them in the first place. But you have my sympathies if you're compelled to do so by work requirements. In that case, I'd use a chroot and custom install all system binaries so that I control exactly what goes in there, and never have the package manager interfere with me.
 Or, on my home computer, someone wrote something cool.... but of
 course they don't offer a package for my system. (At home, I use
 Slackware.) So it is time to build from source. Great, but then it
 is time to track down a hundred tiny libraries (seriously, a 10 kb
 library, why didn't you just include that in your own source?), of
 course matching the version too. What a hassle!

I find that even with sources downloaded from some random person's "cool proggies" website, apt-get install libabc123-dev tends to work quite well, where abc is the name of the library and 123 is the desired version number. You do have to get to know Debian naming conventions for these things to be able to find them easily, though. Or know how to find out the right name(s). My go-to tool is apt-cache search, which is pretty good at finding libraries most people need. It also helps to know how to coax apt-get to fetch specific library versions instead of the default latest version. If I have to install libraries not in the apt repository (or multiple conflicting versions of the same library), I tend to put it either under an entirely different PREFIX, preferably under a dedicated subtree for the app I'm trying to build, or inside a chroot if all else fails. This way I can install libfoo101-dev for randomapp123 in one place, and never have it conflict with libfoo109-dev for randomprog321, which exists in a completely unrelated directory tree. The library can be so b0rken as to use the same soname for incompatible ABIs, and they won't step on each other's toes. For this latter case, chroots are the most convenient setup, otherwise you have to munge around with LD_LIBRARY_PATH, which can get quite messy. (Thankfully, you can put this in a wrapper shell script that hides away the mess under a convenient command in your $PATH, so the pain only has to be felt once.) Generally, all of this is still less painful than trying to make a random binary executable run. For all you know, you could be wasting your time trying to run a Solaris binary on an i386 system. There are just too many possible configurations out there for binary distribution to be viable, except when you're the distro provider.
 Hence my first comment: I prefer to just grab the Windows version
 and run it in wine. That usually just works.

I dunno, wine doesn't seem to like my GUI configuration (or lack thereof :-P). It just falters in its steps and gasps every now and then, that I don't trust that whatever program it's running is actually doing what it should be doing. I still rather build from source. T -- "A man's wife has more power over him than the state has." -- Ralph Emerson
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent =?UTF-8?B?U8O2bmtlIEx1ZHdpZw==?= <sludwig outerproduct.org> writes:
Sublime Text 3 or VisualD, mostly
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 02:54:55AM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:29:28 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
The only time I've actually had trouble with linux binaries is
when there's a problem with libc upgrades

The biggest offender for my home computer is gtk and glib. libc can be painful too - especially with work computers that stick to a particular version in the name of stability (I don't blame them, updating software is an exercise in pain. Even when they don't outright break things, so often they've changed it, now it sucks.). But all those glib whatevers really kill me.

You're right. Building GTK apps require 102 dependencies that may or may not be the exact version the app needs to actually compile. This is another reason I stay away from GUI apps. They're fat, require a veritable labyrinth of dependencies that may or may not work, and is bound to a GUI, generally in an unscriptable way. No thanks. Compiling, installing, and using a CLI app is far easier and in many cases more powerful. If I wanted the eye-candy, I'd go to Windows -- they have better eye-candy. (Well, I did install Compiz with the 3D rotating cube interface once, just for some Linux fanboyistic bragging, but ... actually use that for my everyday tasks? Nah...)
On Windows, when installing stuff I used to always get messages like
"this installer

That's not such a problem anymore since Vista. The system does some magic rewrites so those naughty programs think they are writing to system folders, but are actually pretty isolated.

Ah, figures. My wife's laptop is still running XP. *shrug* It does what she wants, and I don't see why I should replace it with new expensive hardware just so I can run Vista (or whatever), for no real added functionality. But it's good to know they finally got their act together.
 Still worries me on Linux though! "just run sudo make install", and
 trust you not to do anything wrong? Nope!

I *never* do that. I always tell it to install to a different non-system $PREFIX. If it can't, I just delete it outright (or, if I desperately need it, put it inside a chroot).
 On both systems, I don't like installing programs. Whenever I can, I
 like to keep the application in its own folder and run it as my
 limited user account only

Me too.
 (e.g., unzip dmd.zip, run ./dmd2/linux/bin32/dmd. it just worked! and
 any versions can live side by side! and it didn't overwrite anything
 else another program might rely on! WIN!)

+1. :) DMD seriously trumps gcc and its ilk in this area, by a looong shot. You don't realize what a flimsy fortress of cards gcc can be until you've tried to install it by hand. It requires 150 different files installed in 50 scattered locations (along with the 25 requisite ./configure parameters), and if even one of them is wrong, it won't work. When the gcc makefile actually works (and it can be a real challenge to get it to this point, as it's a rather sensitive soul with very high and demanding standards), it does work like a charm. But when it *doesn't*, well ... you may not have any hair left after the ordeal, shall we say. DMD, OTOH, is surprisingly easy to build, and can be run from just about anywhere. I usually just run it straight from dmd/src.
Having said that, though, linux *is* more geared to building from
source than anything else

That'd be great if you didn't have to recreate the original author's environment on your computer, or wait seemingly forever for ./configure to run, then wait forever again for make to run, just to see if the program even does what you want it to do.

Yeah, autotools... that patch upon the patch to a broken bandage over a festering wound on a patch to a bandage over a primitive system stretched beyond its simplistic design... OK OK, I'll refrain from another build system rant here. :-P
 This is why my D programs usually just have a few files you can drop
 in. So I say "get my simpledisplay.d and color.d" and you don't have
 to install it, you don't have to download the same libraries I have,
 you just grab those two files and
 
 dmd yourapp.d simpledisplay.d color.d
 
 and boom, it *should* work. While I do have some other libs
 installed, various C headers and so forth, I think it is
 unreasonable to ask you, my user, to have all that too.

Speaking of which, dmd git HEAD appears to have broken terminal.d sometime recently... if you don't mind could you take a look at it? It's complaining about some template mismatch or some such. :-(
 If modularity and DRY are at odds, I prefer to err on the side of
 fewer dependencies.

Well, dub is proposed to be a solution to this kind of problems, but I haven't really felt the need to use it yet. So far, I've been OK with just downloading D libraries in some local directory and building stuff from source. But then again, I haven't gotten to the point where my D code is big enough and complex enough to face these kinds of issues yet, so who knows. *shrug*
but linux's customizability means

eh to an extent yes, but my custom window manager shouldn't mean your notepad program doesn't work. Maybe some special features won't be the same, but my preference in one location shouldn't break core functionality in another. There is a reasonable common denominator here - people don't customize their ELF loaders (much). They don't hack their kernels so the syscall numbers don't match. Those things actually work, so nobody really cares. Why do people use other sound servers/modules or gui libraries? Because the default is broken. Not because they disagree, but because it is *broken*. So then everyone does their own fixes to work around it... and that leads to pain.

Yeah, sound servers have never worked well for me either. I don't even bother with them nowadays. I usually hate whatever sounds an app makes anyway, so if sound outright doesn't work, so much the better. As long as mpg123 / mplayer works, and I can listen to music of my own choice (instead of whatever dreary soundtrack or cartoon popping sounds the app author feels I must endure through), and as long as skype can pick up my voice and transmit the other person's voice, that's good enough.
 So it isn't end user customizability that cause the problem. It is
 mid-user patching a broken core.

I dunno, I find that ALSA works pretty well these days. It has come a long way since its original inception, when it would mysteriously fail to work for inscrutable reasons, and then just as mysteriously start working again upon the next upgrade. Most apps that interface directly with ALSA tend to Just Work(tm), whereas apps that expect this or that soundserver to be running generally *don't* work, or don't work very well.
Isn't this thread already [OT]? ;-)

yeah but it wasn't meant to be a rant thread! oh well.

Hehe... rant threads are fun! As long as people don't take them too seriously, that is. T -- What is Matter, what is Mind? Never Mind, it doesn't Matter.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 19:56:14 -0400
"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:
 
 I guess that it's a matter of perspective. Personally, I find the
 Windows/DOS shell to be completely unusable and use git-bash when I'm
 forced to use Windows. Windows definitely has some things going for
 it (e.g. its graphics engine creams the horror that is X.org IMHO),
 but on the whole, I find that Linux is just way better for a power
 user like myself. Windows doesn't even come close to cutting it.
 

While I definitely prefer bash to the windows prompt overall, there are some places where I think windows makes the linux cmdline look bad. Like launching a GUI program instead of a CLI: Windows (nice): % program-cli file.txt % program-gui file.txt Linux (wtf?!): % program-cli file.txt % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 & But that's not always right - sometimes you need this instead: % gksudo program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 & But that's not always right either. On some systems it's: % kdesudo program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 & Of course, Linux *also* provides many ways to do it *wrong*, which are naturally more convenient: # Hangs your terminal until you close the gui app, # which is so very useful an enormous 0% of the time: % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 # Seems to work, but various warnings will be randomly # spewed into your terminal while you're trying to use it. % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null & # Same as previous, but with more random spewings. % program-gui file.txt & # Wrong sudo (there are apparently good technical reasons # you're not supposed to do this, even though it normally # appears to works fine anyway) % sudo program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 & On my Linux systems I like to stick these into one of my bin directories (trying to do this from memory, so I may not have it exactly right): % cat gui #!/bin/sh "$*" >/dev/null 2>%1 & % cat gsudo #!/bin/sh # Or kdesudo for KDE gksudo "$*" >/dev/null 2>%1 & Then it's just... % gui kate stuff.d % gsudo kate /some/system/file ...Until the next time I'm on a different unix machine and have to remember to use the full magic incantation again.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Michael" <pr m1xa.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

Sublime Text 3 or TextAdept, 4 whitespaces as tab)))
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 21:52 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
 On 9/13/2013 8:48 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 For the few souls who don't yet... http://xkcd.com/378/


Emacs FTW.
 I've used punch cards and paper tape. But I refused to use paddle switche=

So how did you get the paper tape or punch card loader in without first using the paddle switches? No paddle switch manipulation, no booted computer. :-) --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 03:28:14AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
[...]
 I love writeln debugging. I don't have to boot it up, configure it,
 learn about or task-switch my mind over to any new interface, or
 actively shy away from any opportunities that don't come with a
 fully-mature debugger (or wind up with my arms tied when I'm in the
 debugger habit and don't have a debugger available for whatever
 reason - in my experience, debuggers are reliance-forming drugs).
 
 But the *best* thing of all with writeln debugging: Being able to
 examine the entire relevant execution forwards *and* backwards in time,
 all at a glance, with zero "stepping". Total win.
 
 Any time I use a debugger I get sooo sick of having to reset and hit
 "step" a million times (or muck around with conditional breakpoints,
 which never seem to be intuitive - *if* they even work at all) every
 single time I want to see (or remember) what happened *before*. But
 with writeln - I already see the whole relevant trace at a glance, and
 all with exactly the same tools and interfaces I'm already using.
 
 Writeln debugging rocks my world.

Hmm. Now that you put it *that* way... maybe I should stick with writeln debugging after all. :-P You're right that the most annoying thing about having a "real" debugger is the fact that you can't step backwards. The only thing is, you have to recompile your program each time... but with D's compilation speed, it actually becomes a real alternative. Hmm. One use case that has no writeln equivalent is stepping through assembly code when something REALLY screwed up, like when dealing with dmd codegen bugs. Though for that case, I did recently adopt the method of reading disassembly code listings. I've actually located and fixed several bugs in my work project this way (not with dmd, I mean, but with a C program). People will of course object that assembly is "too obscure to learn", "too hard", ad nauseaum, but I agree with what Knuth said once: if you don't know how the machine *actually* works, the programs you write will be pretty weird (i.e., far removed from reality). IMO the ability to read and understand assembly should be a requirement for every professing programmer. T -- If it's green, it's biology, If it stinks, it's chemistry, If it has numbers it's math, If it doesn't work, it's technology.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Saturday, September 14, 2013 04:23:35 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 19:56:14 -0400
 
 "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:
 I guess that it's a matter of perspective. Personally, I find the
 Windows/DOS shell to be completely unusable and use git-bash when I'm
 forced to use Windows. Windows definitely has some things going for
 it (e.g. its graphics engine creams the horror that is X.org IMHO),
 but on the whole, I find that Linux is just way better for a power
 user like myself. Windows doesn't even come close to cutting it.

While I definitely prefer bash to the windows prompt overall, there are some places where I think windows makes the linux cmdline look bad. Like launching a GUI program instead of a CLI: Windows (nice): % program-cli file.txt % program-gui file.txt Linux (wtf?!): % program-cli file.txt % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 &

I actually often find that convenient, because that means that I can get the output from a GUI program when I need it (generally when there's a problem with it). And if I want to run a GUI program but don't want any output to stdout, I usually just use Alt+F2 to start it (which works in KDE - as I understand it, other DEs have similar facilities). So, I rarely start GUI programs other than gvim from the command line. And gvim actually acts the way that you want. Oddly, it doesn't even require & to avoid having it take over the shell, which I have mixed feelings about. And while I can understand your annoyance, I'd expect there to be more problems in general if GUI programs were treated differently than other programs when run from the command line. Then you'd have to have a way to get the CLI behavior for a GUI program when you needed it rather than having everything just work the same, wheras right now, you just have to learn one way of doing things. But it is true that it's often the case that starting a GUI program from the command line in Linux results in a lot more output than you want if you're just trying to run it. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 01:11:52 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 
 (instead of whatever dreary soundtrack or cartoon popping sounds the
 app author feels I must endure through),

I hate those sounds. Disc ripping/authoring software seems to be the worst, with their patronizing new age-y jingles every time anything finishes/fails.
 and as long as skype can
 pick up my voice and transmit the other person's voice, that's good
 enough.
 

Is the Skype software any less dreadful on Linux than it is on Windows? It used to be that even the close button doesn't work properly, *by design*. But last I looked, the damn thing no longer even *allowed* you to end the glitchy resource-draining process *at all*. And that's just one small aspect of the program. I love the Skype service, but (at least on windows) the software seems committed to forging new ground in "crapware". The android version didn't seem nearly as bad though, but even that had a *lot* of user comments posted about its overall quality and reliability taking a steep nosedive. That was about a year ago though.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 14:29 -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]
 Why can't I move down by 12 paragraphs instead of hitting the down key
 120 times?! (Which, incidentally, takes only 3 keystrokes in vim:
 '12}'.)

OK Vim beats Emacs on that one, for Emacs it Esc 1 2 Ctrl+Down, 4 keystrokes. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Brad Anderson" <eco gnuk.net> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 07:28:33 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
 Yea, notepad has *not* held up well. It's pretty awful. I 
 occasionally
 use it to remove formatting from text I'm copy-pasting, and 
 that's
 about it.

Many programs support Ctrl-Shift-V for pasting plain text.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--089e01538594e005dd04e6549d43
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 14 September 2013 05:48, Namespace <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:

 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try
 this evening VisualD.

Visual Studio on Windows, and MonoDevelop on !Windows. Eclipse occasionally, because Google technology doesn't integrate with VS very well. --089e01538594e005dd04e6549d43 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 <div dir="ltr">On 14 September 2013 05:48, Namespace <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:rswhite4 googlemail.com" target="_blank">rswhite4 googlemail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Just out of interest.<br> <br> I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try this evening VisualD.<br> </blockquote></div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Visual Studio on Windows, and MonoDevelop on !Windows.</div><div class="gmail_extra">Eclipse occasionally, because Google technology doesn&#39;t integrate with VS very well.</div> </div> --089e01538594e005dd04e6549d43--
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Robert Clipsham" <robert octarineparrot.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:00:14 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 01:40:02PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu 
 wrote:
 Syntax highlighting hurts my eyes. I've been using vim in 
 black-on-white
 for more than a decade now. (Well, more accurately, black on an 
 almost
 fully saturated off-white, but that's irrelevant.)


 T

Have you taken a look at solarized? I used to find my eyes straining after a few hours with syntax highlighting until I started using it, now I can stare for days at a time without issue. http://ethanschoonover.com/solarized Unfortunately it's a bit of a pain to set up for command line vim since you need to configure your terminal emulator too - well worth the time though! If you have gvim installed that's probably the easiest way to try it out and see how you feel about it before committing and setting it up properly. Relevant lines for your .vimrc: syntax on " You can set it to dark too for a light-on-dark different theme " I use dark - I figured light would be most similar to what you " currently have with black-on-white. You can see samples of " each on the page linked above set background=light colorscheme solarized
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--047d7b47207c7e082604e654ba2c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 14 September 2013 08:23, Nick Sabalausky <
SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:

 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 23:30:55 +0200
 "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:
 I'm suprised that so few use an IDE. :D

I think IDE users have been avoiding D due to (perceived?) issues with D's IDE support. So those of us that do use D tend to be the ones who don't rely on IDEs. "Chicken and egg"

I agree.. and there are still plenty of issues. major issues. The day there is an IDE integration that's flawless (auto-complete, debugging), and installs by default, is the day D reaches 1 million users ;) --047d7b47207c7e082604e654ba2c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">On 14 September 2013 08:23, Nick Sabalausky <span dir=3D"l= tr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com" target=3D"_b= lank">SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div cla= ss=3D"gmail_extra"> <div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi= n:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im"=
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 23:30:55 +0200<br>

e4 googlemail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; I&#39;m suprised that so few use an IDE. :D<br> <br> </div>I think IDE users have been avoiding D due to (perceived?) issues<br> with D&#39;s IDE support. So those of us that do use D tend to be the ones<= br> who don&#39;t rely on IDEs. &quot;Chicken and egg&quot;<br></blockquote><di= v><br></div><div>I agree.. and there are still plenty of issues. major issu= es.</div><div>The day there is an IDE integration that&#39;s flawless (auto= -complete, debugging), and installs by default, is the day D reaches 1 mill= ion users ;)</div> </div></div></div> --047d7b47207c7e082604e654ba2c--
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 02:57:39AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 22:15:06 -0700
 Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:
 
 On Saturday, September 14, 2013 06:56:10 Paulo Pinto wrote:
 Am 14.09.2013 00:06, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
 .... The features that an IDE has that vim doesn't typically
 just aren't worth it. e.g. if I'm stuck doing Windows
 programming, about the most that I even do with VS is use the
 debugger. I even build from the command line rather than open
 the IDE.
 
 Vim's learning curve is quite nasty, but I definitely think that
 it was worth it.
 
 - Jonathan M Davis

You mean things like: - Semantic refactoring



This would be nice, but I would say if something like this is necessary, then it means the code wasn't properly designed in the first place. Code can, and probably should, be written such that this is never necessary.
 - WYSIWYG design of user interfaces



Ugh. I don't trust that kind of design. It has a tendency to devolve into programs that need screen resolutions with exact pixel sizes and/or make unfounded assumptions about font dimensions. UIs should be *programmatically* specified in such a way that they are logically consistent in layout *regardless* of environmental factors such as screen resolution, font dimensions, etc..
 - code navigation, even across binary modules (call graph, derived
 class, overridden methods, call sites, ...)



Ctags. ;-)
 - graphical representation of code relationships



std.d.lexer + graphviz
 - UML design



Range-based design is better. ;-)
 - visual XML tooling



What would that be for?
 - background compilation showing where there are issues



Waste of resources. I hate it when programs (including IDEs) try to be "smart" and point out perceived problems that may or may not be real problems. The compiler already points out the *real* problems when I decide to compile the code anyway; having an IDE actively try to point out the fact that my code doesn't look like code yet (because I'm still thinking over various implementation possibilities) is very disruptive to my thought processes. I prefer to doodle possible implementations until I mold it into possibly-compilable form first, *before* I even consider running the compiler on it. An IDE to consume system resources while annoying me? No thanks. Let Clippy rest in his grave, don't bring him back from the dead.
 - background static analysis while coding



ditto
 - code completation with documentation popups



I can live without it. Vim has 'K' to open the manpage of the identifier under the cursor anyway -- one of these days, I'm going to write a program to autotranslate ddoc into manpages, then I don't even need to depend on dlang.org anymore. I find autocompletion redundant anyway, since I still prefer to read the module docs thoroughly to know exactly what something does before using it (*especially* if I don't know it well enough to recall the exact name off the top of my head). So it's a nice-to-have, but meh.
 - integrate source code control with task management software to
 track code changes to project tasks



An IDE is not a substitute for my learning how to manage my projects independently of the coding itself. Besides, I've yet to find a task management software that I can tolerate using. I usually just use text files in a specific format that outlines tasks in a hierarchical format, organized into per-task per-project directory trees, in which I keep all associated data like backup files, crash logs, code diffs, etc.. All these have very specific naming conventions and structures that let me find stuff easily, and everything is plain text and greppable for when I need to find a specific detail from an unknown past bugfix, say. I still find grep -E more effective than any task management software's poor imitation of the google search box.
 - map failed unit tests to code lines



Er... isn't that what AssertError line numbers are for?
 I find most of that stuff to be "nice, but not that big a deal" (and a
 few I just plain don't care at all). I used to be a big IDE guy, but
 I've done enough development on various immature platforms and
 ecosystems that I can get by just fine as long as I have:
 
 - Basic editing that's solid, fast, robust
 - Highlighting
 - CLI compiler

For me, I can dispense with the second item. :) Give me vim and a command-line compiler, and I'm good to go.
 I've had to debug things using as little as one LED. So printf
 debugging is perfectly comfortable to me, and I've gotten to the point
 where I even find it preferable to a full debugger in many cases.
 
 The rest is just icing (or gravy if you prefer).

It's funny, the more years I spend coding, the less I found myself using the debugger. Nowadays my debugging approach is approximately: 1) Code inspection: based on the bug description / known steps to reproduce it, locate the general place in the code where the problem is likely to be, and thoroughly audit that piece of code for problems. Roughly 30% of the time, the bug would be found this way, and quite often, other not-yet-found bugs would be discovered too. So it's quite worth the effort before we even use any real debugging tools. 2) Printf/writeln debugging: mainly to determine execution path on the way to the problem, by strategically placing printfs/writelns at branch points and before/after loops, then refining it to loop bodies and functions down the call tree as the location of the problem reveals itself. Once the malfunctioning piece of code is identified, then start to dump variable values, etc., to ascertain the cause of the problem. This actually covers about 60% or so of the cases I've encountered. 3) Use a debugger. I find myself doing this only about 10% of the time. And out of that 10%, 9% is just to get stack traces from segfaults, and only 1% is really using the debugger for stepping through code. All in all, writeln debugging is pretty effective, for all the stigma against it.
 I honestly find almost all of that to be useless or nearly so. The
 only one that I'd actually be much interested in would be better
 code navigation (particularly the ability to hop to the definition
 of a function). And having poor code editing capabilities would
 hamper me quite a bit. So, for me, vim wins hands down.
 

Yea, the basics of code editing are the real #1 thing. If I can't "be one with the cursor and text-edit control", so to speak, then no amount of extra features can make up for it. (Of course, for me that means *not* vi, although I just haven't cared enough to get through the learning curve - but that's just me.)

I utterly hated vi(m) until I actually tried learning it. Then I found that the "be one with the cursor" approach is actually less effective than vim's "describe your edits in a *language* involving verbs, nouns, and adjectives, not just point and grunt" mindset. Nowadays, I actually find other editors rather crude for my tastes. They're too focused on the character-by-character motion of the cursor and the WYTIWAG (what you type is all you get), whereas vim lets you speak to it in a far more expressive language. T -- Do not reason with the unreasonable; you lose by definition.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:19:42 +0200
Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:

 Am 14.09.2013 08:14, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
 Heh, I'm sort of the opposite. I've been using Windows from 3.11
 through 7, and from Vista onward I've started to really hate Windows
 more and more (If I wanted to be running a Mac, I'd have gotten a
 Mac, not two versions of "New Windows: Apple-Envy Edition" followed
 by "Microsoft UI-Of-The-Month Club").

 Meanwhile, I've been using Linux more and more for testing and
 servers, and I'm looking at switching my main OS over to...probably
 Debian 7, with wine and VirtualBox for the occasional things that
 don't come in Linux flavor. I just wish I could get a Linux file
 manager I liked.

The main problem with Linux distributions, is that even in 2013, it won't work properly in laptops. Wireless chipsets, battery use and graphic cards (specially hybrid like optimus) are still a problem.

Really? That's all rather discouraging. As of last year, my primary system is now a laptop, and my concern about laptop-related issues was the main reason I ended up sticking with the factory-installed Win7 instead of upgrading back to XP.
 laptops sold with Linux support.

Those exist? I've long heard stories about such things, but they seem to be like unicorns or mermaids or bigfoot...fantasy creatures you only ever hear tales "through the grapevine" about. Not so much real evidence or first-hand accounts.
 As an example, last April, an Ubuntu update borked my wireless
 driver, because of religious FOSS. Ubuntu developers changed the
 binary broadcom driver, working flawlessly, for the open source one,
 which was still half done.
 
 There is a discussion about it on their forums, if you want a link
 for it.
 

Well, I don't use Ubuntu anymore for my Linux boxes. Migrated upstream to Debian. Any idea if one of the less religious distros (like Mint) would be decent for a laptop, or are non-OSS drivers merely one issue?
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--047d7b6da1cadf8bda04e6550a46
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 14, 2013 7:21 AM, "Nick Sabalausky" <
SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 06:37:49 +0200
 "dusr" <dusr d.usr> wrote:

 Like I said, I've been a Linux user for a long time, and that's
 by choice! But I still envy a lot of what Windows gets right
 and still long for the good old days of DOS where it was just
 you, the hardware, and a little tiny helper library that was
 there if you needed it.

I've used debian from woody to squeeze, then I moved back to windows7. Windows is better.

Heh, I'm sort of the opposite. I've been using Windows from 3.11 through 7, and from Vista onward I've started to really hate Windows more and more (If I wanted to be running a Mac, I'd have gotten a Mac, not two versions of "New Windows: Apple-Envy Edition" followed by "Microsoft UI-Of-The-Month Club"). Meanwhile, I've been using Linux more and more for testing and servers, and I'm looking at switching my main OS over to...probably Debian 7, with wine and VirtualBox for the occasional things that don't come in Linux flavor. I just wish I could get a Linux file manager I liked.

It's not as if window's file manager is any good. :o) Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --047d7b6da1cadf8bda04e6550a46 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 <p><br> On Sep 14, 2013 7:21 AM, &quot;Nick Sabalausky&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com">SeeWebsiteToContactMe s mitwist.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 06:37:49 +0200<br> &gt; &quot;dusr&quot; &lt;dusr d.usr&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; Like I said, I&#39;ve been a Linux user for a long time, and that&#39;s<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; by choice! But I still envy a lot of what Windows gets right<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; and still long for the good old days of DOS where it was just<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; you, the hardware, and a little tiny helper library that was<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; there if you needed it.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; I&#39;ve used debian from woody to squeeze, then I moved back to<br> &gt; &gt; windows7.<br> &gt; &gt; Windows is better.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; Heh, I&#39;m sort of the opposite. I&#39;ve been using Windows from 3.11<br> &gt; through 7, and from Vista onward I&#39;ve started to really hate Windows<br> &gt; more and more (If I wanted to be running a Mac, I&#39;d have gotten a<br> &gt; Mac, not two versions of &quot;New Windows: Apple-Envy Edition&quot; followed by<br> &gt; &quot;Microsoft UI-Of-The-Month Club&quot;).<br> &gt;<br> &gt; Meanwhile, I&#39;ve been using Linux more and more for testing and servers,<br> &gt; and I&#39;m looking at switching my main OS over to...probably Debian 7,<br> &gt; with wine and VirtualBox for the occasional things that don&#39;t come in<br> &gt; Linux flavor. I just wish I could get a Linux file manager I liked.<br> &gt;</p> <p>It&#39;s not as if window&#39;s file manager is any good. :o)<br></p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) = (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;</p> --047d7b6da1cadf8bda04e6550a46--
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "JN" <666total wp.pl> writes:
I assume the question is about D only, then I use Eclipse + DDT 
or CodeBlocks depending on my mood.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 04:23:35AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 19:56:14 -0400
 "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:
 
 I guess that it's a matter of perspective. Personally, I find the
 Windows/DOS shell to be completely unusable and use git-bash when
 I'm forced to use Windows. Windows definitely has some things going
 for it (e.g. its graphics engine creams the horror that is X.org
 IMHO), but on the whole, I find that Linux is just way better for a
 power user like myself. Windows doesn't even come close to cutting
 it.
 

While I definitely prefer bash to the windows prompt overall, there are some places where I think windows makes the linux cmdline look bad. Like launching a GUI program instead of a CLI: Windows (nice): % program-cli file.txt % program-gui file.txt Linux (wtf?!): % program-cli file.txt % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 &

That's only if you don't care about the output of the GUI program, which is usually an indication of errors. Well, unless the GUI program uses one of those stupid chatty toolkits that like to spew EVERYTHING to stdout/stderr, no matter how inane. It violates the rule that programs should be silent by default, and verbose only when asked to be or when an error condition is important enough to warrant soliciting the user's attention. But even then, I usually don't care about these random spews. They can be useful if the GUI program segfaults (which GUI programs are somehow very likely to, for some reason), then you at least have a possibly useful error message. Sending everything into /dev/null by default is a bit counterproductive. One situation where they can be annoying is when you're switching between vim (of course) and the gui program, and the random spewage messes up vim's TUI, then the solution is to hit ctrl-L, which *most* properly-written TUI programs understand as "something threw up all over your terminal, please repaint" (I believe ncurses has a default handler for this, which is nice since all ncurses-based TUIs will respond to ctrl-L in this way). But badly-behaved GUI programs like this I usually just start from a different terminal instead of the one I'm working on, so that the spewage doesn't bother me (and is still there for me to look at if the GUI program crashes, as they're all prone to, and I feel like looking into why they did). Ratpoison is really useful for this, since it's just two keystrokes to open a new terminal or switch to an existing dedicated spewage terminal, then start the GUI app, then two keystrokes to go back to your "main" terminal. Done this way, you don't even need to put the & at the end of the command (though I still do just out of habit). And if I need to start multiple GUI apps from the same spewage terminal, I just ctrl-Z to suspend the first one, 'bg' to background it (the afterthought equivalent of &), then start the second app. Or better yet, with ratpoison, since it's just two keystrokes to open a new terminal, I'd just open a new terminal, start the gui app with just a single &, then *kill* that terminal (also just 2 keystrokes in ratpoison) so that the OS sends all output to /dev/null for me without me ever needing to name /dev/null manually. :) That's 4 keystrokes compared to that idiotic verbose bash syntax for redirecting stdin/stderr to /dev/null (which I'm no fan of, just for the record), that takes ... let's see... 15+ keystrokes. Ratpoison FTW. :)
 But that's not always right - sometimes you need this instead:
 % gksudo program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 &

GUI programs that need sudo privileges are Teh Evil. I avoid them like the plague. Unless they're the system package manager, but in that case I'd use the CLI equivalents anyway, so this baroque dance is never necessary for me. :-P
 But that's not always right either. On some systems it's:
 % kdesudo program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 &

I have an intense hatred of anything GUI that asks for root privileges. GUI apps are just too fragile, too fat, too crash-prone, to entrust with root privileges. I have no confidence they will not also have nasty bugs that destroys or overwrites system files (a pet peeve of mine is gui programs that insist on creating stuff in $HOME that isn't their own app-specific dotfile or under their own dedicated dotdirectory -- some of them are quite insistent at recreating this detritus even after I manually delete them -- how am I to know if they won't do this to system files too?). So I never, ever, use gksudo or kdesudo. For me, root == strictly CLI-only.
 Of course, Linux *also* provides many ways to do it *wrong*, which are
 naturally more convenient:
 
 # Hangs your terminal until you close the gui app,
 # which is so very useful an enormous 0% of the time:
 % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1
 
 # Seems to work, but various warnings will be randomly
 # spewed into your terminal while you're trying to use it.
 % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null &
 
 # Same as previous, but with more random spewings.
 % program-gui file.txt &

None of this are an issue if you've a fast way to starting up / switching to a specific terminal dedicated for containing spewage. :) (Of course, the fact the majority of gui programs love spewing like this is a sign of a fundamental pathology common to such programs, but that belongs in another rant. :-P It's one of the many reasons I have an aversion to all things GUI. In fact, in *my* book, a proper GUI program should automatically detach itself from the terminal at startup -- there are well-known, standard ways of doing this, but alas, most GUI developers don't care enough to do it.) T -- Designer clothes: how to cover less by paying more.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:22:16 +0200
"deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> wrote:
 
 Because virus nowaday aren't there to destroy your computer, but 
 to make it participate in botnet. Being as discrete as possible 
 is the goal.
 

Well, either that or Ransom-ware which is the exact opposite: "Buy our antivirus program and we promise we'll let you use your computer again." That's the crap I've had to clear off other people's computers.
 And probably also because you use trusted sources + a bit of luck.

Plus I seem to be the only Windows user in history who has never said "Uhh, ok" to a "Super-helpful web browser toolbar! You'll love it! Install now!"
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--047d7b6da1ca4be66904e6554d26
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 14, 2013 8:21 AM, "Paulo Pinto" <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:
 Am 14.09.2013 08:14, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:

 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 06:37:49 +0200
 "dusr" <dusr d.usr> wrote:

 Like I said, I've been a Linux user for a long time, and that's
 by choice! But I still envy a lot of what Windows gets right
 and still long for the good old days of DOS where it was just
 you, the hardware, and a little tiny helper library that was
 there if you needed it.

I've used debian from woody to squeeze, then I moved back to windows7. Windows is better.

Heh, I'm sort of the opposite. I've been using Windows from 3.11 through 7, and from Vista onward I've started to really hate Windows more and more (If I wanted to be running a Mac, I'd have gotten a Mac, not two versions of "New Windows: Apple-Envy Edition" followed by "Microsoft UI-Of-The-Month Club"). Meanwhile, I've been using Linux more and more for testing and servers, and I'm looking at switching my main OS over to...probably Debian 7, with wine and VirtualBox for the occasional things that don't come in Linux flavor. I just wish I could get a Linux file manager I liked.

The main problem with Linux distributions, is that even in 2013, it won't

 Wireless chipsets, battery use and graphic cards (specially hybrid like

 Personally I only use Linux on servers, VMs, or laptops sold with Linux

 As an example, last April, an Ubuntu update borked my wireless driver,

driver, working flawlessly, for the open source one, which was still half done.
 There is a discussion about it on their forums, if you want a link for it.

 So nowadays I rather use systems for work, that value my up time.

If I was to install Windows or OSX on my laptop I'd probably have similar issues with wireless, display not working, etc... There are plenty of places to check hardware compatibility of a laptop/computer you are thinking about purchasing (e.g. http://h-node.org ) - there are even some things that I boycott because of ethical feelings towards the manufacturer or technology (e.g. UEFI). If you don't want the hassle of checking that each component works with your favourite OS, then you can simply go down the pre installed route. https://www.system76.com As for your wireless driver woes, I'm sure you still had the choice to go for the proprietary drivers, which would mean you have to also blacklist the OSS one (done this plenty in the past, except for resolving conflicts with OSS drivers that think they can talk to the same device, but one gives me 1m wireless AP scanning range, and the other 30m :) Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --047d7b6da1ca4be66904e6554d26 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 14, 2013 8:21 AM, &quot;Paulo Pinto&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:pjml= p progtools.org">pjmlp progtools.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; Am 14.09.2013 08:14, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:<br> &gt;<br> &gt;&gt; On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 06:37:49 +0200<br> &gt;&gt; &quot;dusr&quot; &lt;dusr d.usr&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;&gt;<br> &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Like I said, I&#39;ve been a Linux user for a long time, a= nd that&#39;s<br> &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; by choice! But I still envy a lot of what Windows gets rig= ht<br> &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; and still long for the good old days of DOS where it was j= ust<br> &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; you, the hardware, and a little tiny helper library that w= as<br> &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; there if you needed it.<br> &gt;&gt;&gt;<br> &gt;&gt;&gt;<br> &gt;&gt;&gt; I&#39;ve used debian from woody to squeeze, then I moved back = to<br> &gt;&gt;&gt; windows7.<br> &gt;&gt;&gt; Windows is better.<br> &gt;&gt;<br> &gt;&gt;<br> &gt;&gt; Heh, I&#39;m sort of the opposite. I&#39;ve been using Windows fro= m 3.11<br> &gt;&gt; through 7, and from Vista onward I&#39;ve started to really hate W= indows<br> &gt;&gt; more and more (If I wanted to be running a Mac, I&#39;d have gotte= n a<br> &gt;&gt; Mac, not two versions of &quot;New Windows: Apple-Envy Edition&quo= t; followed by<br> &gt;&gt; &quot;Microsoft UI-Of-The-Month Club&quot;).<br> &gt;&gt;<br> &gt;&gt; Meanwhile, I&#39;ve been using Linux more and more for testing and= servers,<br> &gt;&gt; and I&#39;m looking at switching my main OS over to...probably Deb= ian 7,<br> &gt;&gt; with wine and VirtualBox for the occasional things that don&#39;t = come in<br> &gt;&gt; Linux flavor. I just wish I could get a Linux file manager I liked= .<br> &gt;&gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; The main problem with Linux distributions, is that even in 2013, it wo= n&#39;t work properly in laptops.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; Wireless chipsets, battery use and graphic cards (specially hybrid lik= e optimus) are still a problem.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; Personally I only use Linux on servers, VMs, or laptops sold with Linu= x support.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; As an example, last April, an Ubuntu update borked my wireless driver,= because of religious FOSS. Ubuntu developers changed the binary broadcom d= river, working flawlessly, for the open source one, which was still half do= ne.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; There is a discussion about it on their forums, if you want a link for= it.<br> &gt;<br> &gt; So nowadays I rather use systems for work, that value my up time.<br> &gt;</p> <p>If I was to install Windows or OSX on my laptop I&#39;d probably have si= milar issues with wireless, display not working, etc...</p> <p>There are plenty of places to check hardware compatibility of a laptop/c= omputer you are thinking about purchasing (e.g. <a href=3D"http://h-node.or= g">http://h-node.org</a> ) - there are even some things that I boycott beca= use of ethical feelings towards the manufacturer or technology (e.g. UEFI).= </p> <p>If you don&#39;t want the hassle of checking that each component works w= ith your favourite OS, then you can simply go down the pre installed route.= <a href=3D"https://www.system76.com">https://www.system76.com</a></p> <p>As for your wireless driver woes, I&#39;m sure you still had the choice = to go for the proprietary drivers, which would mean you have to also blackl= ist the OSS one (done this plenty in the past, except for resolving conflic= ts with OSS drivers that think they can talk to the same device, but one gi= ves me 1m wireless AP scanning range, and the other 30m :)</p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;</p> --047d7b6da1ca4be66904e6554d26--
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:34:07 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 
 When I custom-install stuff, I usually put it in /usr/local/*, or even
 give it a dedicated home in /home (though usually just
 /usr/src/$pkgname/install or some such), away from the package manager
 managed stuff.  It tends to work far better that way.  Fighting with
 the package manager never ends well, as does installing external
 files into directories managed by the package manager.

My understanding (purely from the link below) was that /usr/local/* was *specifically* for non-package-managered stuff, whereas /usr/* was *specifically* for package-managered things: http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/8656/usr-bin-vs-usr-local-bin-on-linux
 If I have to install libraries not in the apt repository (or multiple
 conflicting versions of the same library), I tend to put it either
 under an entirely different PREFIX, preferably under a dedicated
 subtree for the app I'm trying to build

I had no idea you could do that! That's fantastic: despite my migration towards Linux, I had been worrying about the day I'd inevitable have to deal with multiple versions of the same thing.
 Hence my first comment: I prefer to just grab the Windows version
 and run it in wine. That usually just works.

I dunno, wine doesn't seem to like my GUI configuration (or lack thereof :-P). It just falters in its steps and gasps every now and then, that I don't trust that whatever program it's running is actually doing what it should be doing. I still rather build from source.

I find GUI apps to be butt-ugly under wine ;) But often usable otherwise (not that I've used it much so far).
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 02:39:05 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 
 UIs should be
 *programmatically* specified in such a way that they are logically
 consistent in layout *regardless* of environmental factors such as
 screen resolution, font dimensions, etc..
 

That's exactly why I hate CSS for layout. Although I found Visual C#'s WYSIWYG GUI editor (and even MS's stuff as far back as Visual Basic 3) to make it fairly easy to make things adjust properly. Probably because Win32 (like other GUI systems) is designed for things like docked widget containers and auto-resizing main content. That said, it does still make it easy for bad designers to do things the wrong way. But then, the same is true for programmatic layouts.
 - graphical representation of code relationships



std.d.lexer + graphviz

I think another layer on top of graphviz might be needed for that to really be comparable. I've played with graphviz's DOT format a little bit and found that it often takes some thought and tweaking to make non-trivial graphs that are particularly good (and not gigantic). Plus, to my knowledge (I could be wrong), I don't think it has any way to generate interactive graphcs - graphs that you can drag parts around to make it look good. Just static images, AIUI.
 - visual XML tooling



What would that be for?

For indulging MS's XML obsession ;) j/k
 - background compilation showing where there are issues



Waste of resources. I hate it when programs (including IDEs) try to be "smart" and point out perceived problems that may or may not be real problems. The compiler already points out the *real* problems when I decide to compile the code anyway; having an IDE actively try to point out the fact that my code doesn't look like code yet (because I'm still thinking over various implementation possibilities) is very disruptive to my thought processes. I prefer to doodle possible implementations until I mold it into possibly-compilable form first, *before* I even consider running the compiler on it. An IDE to consume system resources while annoying me? No thanks. Let Clippy rest in his grave, don't bring him back from the dead.

I actually found it nice in Visual C#. Although I think it did occasionally annoy me with complaints about stuff I was still typing (unless I'm thinking of VB6...), and I definitely don't find it worth the cost of occasionally laggy text-editing.
 - map failed unit tests to code lines



Er... isn't that what AssertError line numbers are for?

Yea. My code editor uses a (optionally customizable) regex to grep for any "filename(line_number):" lines in the output panel. It converts them to "jump to that line in the source" links. That'll work for any tool, unittest, compiler, whatever. So this is not something that requires a full-blown IDE.
 
 - Basic editing that's solid, fast, robust
 - Highlighting
 - CLI compiler

For me, I can dispense with the second item. :) Give me vim and a command-line compiler, and I'm good to go.

Heh, I can go without it for short periods of time if I really need to. (I already do any time I use my source-diffing program.) I'm so used to it though, I find it very difficult to visually parse non-highlighted code in anything that isn't a pure data langauge (and even then it helps).
 
 I've had to debug things using as little as one LED. So printf
 debugging is perfectly comfortable to me, and I've gotten to the
 point where I even find it preferable to a full debugger in many
 cases.
 
 The rest is just icing (or gravy if you prefer).

It's funny, the more years I spend coding, the less I found myself using the debugger. Nowadays my debugging approach is approximately: 1) Code inspection: based on the bug description / known steps to reproduce it, locate the general place in the code where the problem is likely to be, and thoroughly audit that piece of code for problems. Roughly 30% of the time, the bug would be found this way, and quite often, other not-yet-found bugs would be discovered too. So it's quite worth the effort before we even use any real debugging tools. 2) Printf/writeln debugging: mainly to determine execution path on the way to the problem, by strategically placing printfs/writelns at branch points and before/after loops, then refining it to loop bodies and functions down the call tree as the location of the problem reveals itself. Once the malfunctioning piece of code is identified, then start to dump variable values, etc., to ascertain the cause of the problem. This actually covers about 60% or so of the cases I've encountered. 3) Use a debugger. I find myself doing this only about 10% of the time. And out of that 10%, 9% is just to get stack traces from segfaults, and only 1% is really using the debugger for stepping through code. All in all, writeln debugging is pretty effective, for all the stigma against it.

Yea, I use pretty much the same approach, although my proportions might be a little different. I've become so accustomed to printf debugging (a habit developed through too many situations where no real debugger was available), that even when I should fire up a debugger I try to push through with printf-approach anyway because "Ehh, I don't feel like trying to remember how to hook this up to a debugger..." Plus I've been dev'ing on windows, so instead of segfaults, D throws an Error and gives me a stack trace :) Developing in any situation (not necessarily D) where I *don't* get stack traces is a PITA. Of course, printf debugging usually works there too, but it feels much more painful when I'm thinking "Ehh, I have to do this just because I'm not being immediately spoon-fed the stack trace? This blows!"
 
 Yea, the basics of code editing are the real #1 thing. If I can't
 "be one with the cursor and text-edit control", so to speak, then no
 amount of extra features can make up for it. (Of course, for me that
 means *not* vi, although I just haven't cared enough to get through
 the learning curve - but that's just me.)

I utterly hated vi(m) until I actually tried learning it. Then I found that the "be one with the cursor" approach is actually less effective than vim's "describe your edits in a *language* involving verbs, nouns, and adjectives, not just point and grunt" mindset. Nowadays, I actually find other editors rather crude for my tastes. They're too focused on the character-by-character motion of the cursor and the WYTIWAG (what you type is all you get), whereas vim lets you speak to it in a far more expressive language.

Well, "be one with the commands" in that case ;) Or "be one with the keyboard", which is still critical for me, too: I feel like I'm running through sand when I have to code with a built-in laptop keyboard (especially because of the lack of *proper* arrow/home/end/del/page keys, but also just the overall size/shape/feel of the keys). I really can believe what you're saying about vi. Personally though, I just haven't felt much of a need or desire to really give it a chance anyway. And (in a small way) I almost don't want to like it - I'm already in the minority on enough things ;) Maybe I will someday out of curiosity, I dunno. The "counting words/chars/lines" in particular seems rather off-putting to me though. Ex: I like to just Ctrl-Left/Right across however many words I need and don't really want to start caring how many words/lines away something is.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 08:23:54 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 19:56:14 -0400
 "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:
 
 I guess that it's a matter of perspective. Personally, I find 
 the
 Windows/DOS shell to be completely unusable and use git-bash 
 when I'm
 forced to use Windows. Windows definitely has some things 
 going for
 it (e.g. its graphics engine creams the horror that is X.org 
 IMHO),
 but on the whole, I find that Linux is just way better for a 
 power
 user like myself. Windows doesn't even come close to cutting 
 it.
 

While I definitely prefer bash to the windows prompt overall, there are some places where I think windows makes the linux cmdline look bad. Like launching a GUI program instead of a CLI: Windows (nice): % program-cli file.txt % program-gui file.txt Linux (wtf?!): % program-cli file.txt % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 & But that's not always right - sometimes you need this instead: % gksudo program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 & But that's not always right either. On some systems it's: % kdesudo program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 & Of course, Linux *also* provides many ways to do it *wrong*, which are naturally more convenient: # Hangs your terminal until you close the gui app, # which is so very useful an enormous 0% of the time: % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 # Seems to work, but various warnings will be randomly # spewed into your terminal while you're trying to use it. % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null & # Same as previous, but with more random spewings. % program-gui file.txt & # Wrong sudo (there are apparently good technical reasons # you're not supposed to do this, even though it normally # appears to works fine anyway) % sudo program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 & On my Linux systems I like to stick these into one of my bin directories (trying to do this from memory, so I may not have it exactly right): % cat gui #!/bin/sh "$*" >/dev/null 2>%1 & % cat gsudo #!/bin/sh # Or kdesudo for KDE gksudo "$*" >/dev/null 2>%1 & Then it's just... % gui kate stuff.d % gsudo kate /some/system/file ...Until the next time I'm on a different unix machine and have to remember to use the full magic incantation again.

You are either dishonest or a complete morron. By respect for you, I'll pick the first one.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, 2013-09-14 at 09:53 +0100, Russel Winder wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]
 OK Vim beats Emacs on that one, for Emacs it Esc 1 2 Ctrl+Down, 4
 keystrokes.

Of course Vim is completely unusable since it relies on using monospace fonts, where everyone one knows that reading is best done with proportional fonts. <yes-this-is-a-bit-of-an-intentional-troll/> :-) --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> writes:
I never thought that this becomes a discussion about windows 
versus linux. :o
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 14 September 2013 04:36, Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 02:59:49 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 Unless you enjoy spending hours on end removing viruses from your system.
 :)

Meh, do you actually review the source of everything you compile? I betcha if I made a makefile

Bit of a trick question, as I get sources from either distribution repositories or ftp.gnu.org - both considered to be a trusted source that wouldn't have that problem. So if you made a makefile, chances am I wouldn't use it. -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 01:40:30 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 
 The only thing is, you have to recompile your program each
 time... but with D's compilation speed, it actually becomes a real
 alternative. Hmm.
 

Exactly. And I totally understand the focus on debuggers in the C/C++ world, just because of that.
 One use case that has no writeln equivalent is stepping through
 assembly code when something REALLY screwed up, like when dealing
 with dmd codegen bugs.

Yea, that's true.
 Though for that case, I did recently adopt the
 method of reading disassembly code listings. I've actually located
 and fixed several bugs in my work project this way (not with dmd, I
 mean, but with a C program). People will of course object that
 assembly is "too obscure to learn", "too hard", ad nauseaum, but I
 agree with what Knuth said once: if you don't know how the machine
 *actually* works, the programs you write will be pretty weird (i.e.,
 far removed from reality). IMO the ability to read and understand
 assembly should be a requirement for every professing programmer.
 

Yea, I agree. Once I graduated from "just playing around in BASIC", the stuff I really started out with was indie/homebrew videogames. This was back at the tail end of the DOS days, so direct hardware access, the occasional ASM and a frequent focus on optimization were just the normal way of things. Once I moved into higher-level stuff, I always felt that understanding was still a big benefit. I've come to think about it in terms of a more general principle, a corollary to the law of leaky abstractions: To *truly* be good in any endeavor, you need to have a good understanding of not only that, but also whatever abstraction is directly underneath. To be good at high-level code, you need to understand a thing or two about low-level code. To be good at low-level code, you have to end up picking up a bit of digital EE. I've actually studied a little bit of digital EE and although I'm no expert, I can tell you that analog EE is critically important to being good at digital EE. And I'd be willing to bet chemistry would be a crucial ally to any really good analog electronics expert. Going the other direction: To be any good at designing software, it would be important to know at least something about high-level code. And it's not just computers/electronics, it's other things: Top-of-the-line athletic training these days (sports, martial arts, dancing, whatever) involves a lot of very explicit attention to biology and newtonian physics.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Paolo Invernizzi" <paolo.invernizzi gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 07:28:33 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
 Any time I use a debugger I get sooo sick of having to reset 
 and hit
 "step" a million times (or muck around with conditional 
 breakpoints,
 which never seem to be intuitive - *if* they even work at all) 
 every
 single time I want to see (or remember) what happened *before*. 
 But
 with writeln - I already see the whole relevant trace at a 
 glance, and
 all with exactly the same tools and interfaces I'm already 
 using.

 Writeln debugging rocks my world.

Give me a way to writeln the callstack frames at a certain point, and I'll take that: until this, I still need a debugger for following the program flow. And no, adding a writeln everywhere you call that function is not a solution. - Paolo
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-13 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try
 this evening VisualD.

TextMate on Mac OS X, Sublime on the other platforms. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 14 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-14 16:14, deadalnix wrote:

 Why not sublime if you use it on other plateforms ?

I like it better. See my reply to Peter as well: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/fxuwovrirseuatzeeprb forum.dlang.org?page=16#post-l120af:241qtj:241:40digitalmars.com It's more adapted to Mac OS X. Basically all cross-platform applications fails on Mac OS X. I only use Sublime on the other platforms because TextMate doesn't exist on them. I do all my coding on Mac OS X, cross-platform. It's only when need to compile for another platform, when doing a release, I switch to another platform. Then it's usually only minor tweaks which is necessary to get it to run properly, hopefully :). -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 12:35:42 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
wrote:
 On 2013-09-13 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try
 this evening VisualD.

TextMate on Mac OS X, Sublime on the other platforms.

Why not sublime if you use it on other plateforms ?
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 12:38:35 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
wrote:
 On 2013-09-13 21:51, Peter Alexander wrote:
 Sublime 3 on OSX

Not TextMate on Mac OS X, you're mad :)

What does TextMate do better than Sublime? (genuine question)
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 09:40:28 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 I can live without it. Vim has 'K' to open the manpage of the 
 identifier under the cursor anyway -- one of these days, I'm 
 going to write a program to autotranslate ddoc into manpages, 
 then I don't even need to depend on dlang.org anymore.

#!/bin/bash links http://dpldocs.info/$1 # then in vim # :set keywordprg=/home/me/bin/dpldocs it mostly works. dpldocs.info is something I've been meaning to finish for years now, literally, but eh it is good enough for some stuff so I sometimes use it, and it is kinda up to date. Also has a few of my modules in there too!
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 23:56:26 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 Personally, I find the Windows/DOS
 shell to be completely unusable and use git-bash when I'm

cmd.exe is indeed painful to use. I blame it's weird history and tab completion. It has them so you want to use it.... but they are weird. The commands don't bother me, the different quoting and (lack of?) looping don't bother me - I prefer to just use D for anything more than a line or three of shell anyway - but the history and compleition are really annoying. Linux's greatest asset is gnu readline.
 Windows definitely has some things going for it (e.g. its 
 graphics engine creams the horror that is X.org IMHO)

hell yes, and MIDI actually works there too! Ever try to use linux with a soundblaster 16? Sounded horrible. Worse yet, try to set up midi softsynth with ALSA. So much stupid crap.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 08:13:13 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 installing, and using a CLI app is far easier and in many cases 
 more powerful.

I tried to find a program for the recent thing and couldn't - I wanted to view a Microsoft .doc file. I ended up just opening it in vi and searching for ascii text. It worked!
 I *never* do that. I always tell it to install to a different 
 non-system $PREFIX.

I've been starting to get in this habit.... hmmm maybe I should just set the environment variable in my bashrc so i don't have to think about it. That's not a bad idea.
 Speaking of which, dmd git HEAD appears to have broken 
 terminal.d sometime recently

dmd's update? blargh i'll try it later.
 and as long as skype can pick up my voice and transmit the 
 other person's voice

...to the NSA lol
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 06:15:08 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
 Heh, I'm sort of the opposite. I've been using Windows from 3.11
 through 7, and from Vista onward I've started to really hate 
 Windows more and more

I kinda love Windows Vista. The little start menu command line rocks and I missed it back on XP. On my linux box, I have the menu key next to the right windows key set to pull up an rxvt. So I hit that, do some command, then ctrl+d to get rid of it when done. Finally, Windows Vista kinda sorta matches that: hit the windows key, type something, and go.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 04:49:09 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:
 Those cross platform libraries never work cross platform 
 without far more pain than just rolling your own.

Aye, and you've really gotta understand what's going on anyway to use the library effectively. Why doesn't it do this? Why is this code buggy? By the time you've figured that out, you've done the same work as diy anyway!
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Saturday, September 14, 2013 05:58:51 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 Those exist?
 
 I've long heard stories about such things, but they seem to be like
 unicorns or mermaids or bigfoot...fantasy creatures you only ever hear
 tales "through the grapevine" about. Not so much real evidence or
 first-hand accounts.

Lenovo and Dell certainly used to, but I don't know about right now. One company that's definitely still doing it though is System76 (who is one of the Linux Action Show's sponsors). _All_ of the systems that they build are built specifically for Linux (both desktop and laptop). They don't even sell anything with Windows on it. I always build my own desktops, but the next time that I'm in the market for a laptop, I'll probably end up getting one from them. www.system76.com - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 11:35:26AM +0200, Robert Clipsham wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:00:14 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 01:40:02PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Syntax highlighting hurts my eyes. I've been using vim in
black-on-white for more than a decade now. (Well, more accurately,
black on an almost fully saturated off-white, but that's irrelevant.)


T

Have you taken a look at solarized? I used to find my eyes straining after a few hours with syntax highlighting until I started using it, now I can stare for days at a time without issue. http://ethanschoonover.com/solarized

Nah, it's still too rainbow-y for me. I still prefer no syntax highlighting. T -- LINUX = Lousy Interface for Nefarious Unix Xenophobes.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Saturday, September 14, 2013 10:11:59 H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Nah, it's still too rainbow-y for me. I still prefer no syntax
 highlighting.

Whereas I would feel almost like I was walking around blind if there were no syntax highlighting. I can certainly read code without syntax highlighting, but it's much harder. To each their own I guess. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 02:25:43PM +0200, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 07:28:33 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
 wrote:
Any time I use a debugger I get sooo sick of having to reset and hit
"step" a million times (or muck around with conditional breakpoints,
which never seem to be intuitive - *if* they even work at all) every
single time I want to see (or remember) what happened *before*.  But
with writeln - I already see the whole relevant trace at a glance,
and all with exactly the same tools and interfaces I'm already using.

Writeln debugging rocks my world.

Give me a way to writeln the callstack frames at a certain point, and I'll take that: until this, I still need a debugger for following the program flow.

I'm pretty sure this is possible with a little effort. In fact, this would be a game-changer to writeln debugging. I should take a look at the stack unwinding code in druntime sometime and see if I can knock something together that does this. One trick my coworkers like to use sometimes (with C/C++) is to insert an infinite loop into the program at the suspected problem spot, then at runtime when it reaches 99% CPU, kill -11 to force a segfault to generate a stack trace (we have a stacktrace generator hooked up to the signal handler). I've used that a couple o' times, and it's surprisingly effective, I must say. We found that sometimes this is the only approach that is effective, since the path to get to the problem spot may be completely non-trivial to reach from a debugger (may involve fork()'s, dynamically-loaded .so's, and event loops dispatches triggered by real-time network data that would be excruciatingly slow to step through manually in a debugger). Still, if there was a way to print a stacktrace *without* terminating the program, that would be an invaluable addition to our toolset.
 And no, adding a writeln everywhere you call that function is not a
 solution.

True, this is one of the weak points of writeln debugging. Though I usually start from the top-level, so generally by the time I get to a specific function I already know how it got there. OTOH, even displaying callstack may not help if your code is heavy on callbacks (or in D, delegates) invoked from event loops. The original context that registered the callback is long gone by the time the function actually runs, so the callstack only goes down to the event dispatcher, which is no help. T -- It said to install Windows 2000 or better, so I installed Linux instead.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 12:25:44 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi
wrote:
 Give me a way to writeln the callstack frames at a certain

Challenge accepted: import std.stdio; string getStackTrace() { import core.runtime; version(Posix) { // druntime cuts out the first few functions on the trace as they are internal // so we'll make some dummy functions here so our actual info doesn't get cut Throwable.TraceInfo f5() { return defaultTraceHandler(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f4() { return f5(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f3() { return f4(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f2() { return f3(); } auto stuff = f2(); } else { auto stuff = defaultTraceHandler(); } return stuff.toString(); } void foo() { writeln("on foo"); bar(); } void bar() { writeln("on bar"); omg(); } void omg() { writeln("on omg"); writeln(getStackTrace()); } void main() { omg(); writeln("\n****\n"); foo(); }
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 01:49:43PM +0200, Namespace wrote:
 I never thought that this becomes a discussion about windows versus
 linux. :o

Didn't you know? An IDE/editor religious flamewar inevitably devolves into an OS religious flamewar? Just give it another week or so to devolve further, and I'm pretty sure we'll be able to invoke Godwin's Law. :-P T -- Why do conspiracy theories always come from the same people??
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 17:31:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 I'm pretty sure this is possible with a little effort.

beat you to it! http://forum.dlang.org/thread/fxuwovrirseuatzeeprb forum.dlang.org?page=17#post-jxqobgridgweioqclfqr:40forum.dlang.org
 One trick my coworkers like to use sometimes (with C/C++) is to 
 insert an infinite loop into the program at the suspected 
 problem spot, then at runtime when it reaches 99% CPU

In D, I like to just sprinkle assert(0)'s in places. It actually works pretty well - you can do a binary search of even a fairly large codebase in just a few iterations, then fix up the asserts to actually check what went wrong, and then keep them there later to form sanity checks or unit tests to catch regressions after the bug is fixed.
 OTOH, even displaying callstack may not help if your code is 
 heavy on callbacks (or in D, delegates) invoked from event 
 loops.

indeed.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 07:34:26PM +0200, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 12:25:44 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi
 wrote:
Give me a way to writeln the callstack frames at a certain

Challenge accepted: import std.stdio; string getStackTrace() { import core.runtime; version(Posix) { // druntime cuts out the first few functions on the trace as they are internal // so we'll make some dummy functions here so our actual info doesn't get cut Throwable.TraceInfo f5() { return defaultTraceHandler(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f4() { return f5(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f3() { return f4(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f2() { return f3(); } auto stuff = f2(); } else { auto stuff = defaultTraceHandler(); } return stuff.toString(); } void foo() { writeln("on foo"); bar(); } void bar() { writeln("on bar"); omg(); } void omg() { writeln("on omg"); writeln(getStackTrace()); } void main() { omg(); writeln("\n****\n"); foo(); }

Whoa. My hats off to you, sir!! (And yes, I did actually test this code with a few call trees of my own. It really does work! Amazing.) I'm gonna put this into my personal D library, right now! T -- Recently, our IT department hired a bug-fix engineer. He used to work for Volkswagen.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 14 September 2013 18:11, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 11:35:26AM +0200, Robert Clipsham wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 21:00:14 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 01:40:02PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Syntax highlighting hurts my eyes. I've been using vim in
black-on-white for more than a decade now. (Well, more accurately,
black on an almost fully saturated off-white, but that's irrelevant.)


T

Have you taken a look at solarized? I used to find my eyes straining after a few hours with syntax highlighting until I started using it, now I can stare for days at a time without issue. http://ethanschoonover.com/solarized

Nah, it's still too rainbow-y for me. I still prefer no syntax highlighting.

I thought Zenburn was the go to syntax highlighting scheme for those who work in low light settings. :-) -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 14 September 2013 18:36, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 01:49:43PM +0200, Namespace wrote:
 I never thought that this becomes a discussion about windows versus
 linux. :o

Didn't you know? An IDE/editor religious flamewar inevitably devolves into an OS religious flamewar? Just give it another week or so to devolve further, and I'm pretty sure we'll be able to invoke Godwin's Law. :-P

Followed swiftly by the lesser known Lewis' Law. -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Justin Whear" <justin economicmodeling.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 05:15:32 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 On Saturday, September 14, 2013 06:56:10 Paulo Pinto wrote:
 Am 14.09.2013 00:06, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
 .... The features that an IDE has that
 vim doesn't typically just aren't worth it. e.g. if I'm 
 stuck doing
 Windows
 programming, about the most that I even do with VS is use 
 the debugger. I
 even build from the command line rather than open the IDE.
 
 Vim's learning curve is quite nasty, but I definitely think 
 that it was
 worth it.
 
 - Jonathan M Davis

You mean things like: - Semantic refactoring - WYSIWYG design of user interfaces - code navigation, even across binary modules (call graph, derived class, overridden methods, call sites, ...) - graphical representation of code relationships - UML design - visual XML tooling - background compilation showing where there are issues - background static analysis while coding - code completation with documentation popups - integrate source code control with task management software to track code changes to project tasks - map failed unit tests to code lines - ...

I honestly find almost all of that to be useless or nearly so. The only one that I'd actually be much interested in would be better code navigation (particularly the ability to hop to the definition of a function). And having poor code editing capabilities would hamper me quite a bit. So, for me, vim wins hands down. - Jonathan M Davis

Vim has ctags integration, 'gd' for "Go to definition", and :tag somefunction/struct/etc When working on a big project it can be very nice to start vim with: $ vim -t someFunction I usually have a `tags` target in my makefile which uses Dscanner.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Justin Whear" <justin economicmodeling.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 16:20:21 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 On Saturday, September 14, 2013 05:58:51 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 Those exist?
 
 I've long heard stories about such things, but they seem to be 
 like
 unicorns or mermaids or bigfoot...fantasy creatures you only 
 ever hear
 tales "through the grapevine" about. Not so much real evidence 
 or
 first-hand accounts.

Lenovo and Dell certainly used to, but I don't know about right now. One company that's definitely still doing it though is System76 (who is one of the Linux Action Show's sponsors). _All_ of the systems that they build are built specifically for Linux (both desktop and laptop). They don't even sell anything with Windows on it. I always build my own desktops, but the next time that I'm in the market for a laptop, I'll probably end up getting one from them. www.system76.com - Jonathan M Davis

My work laptop: http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/xps-13-linux/pd Well made, works out of the box. I hook it up to two large external monitors and a real keyboard when I'm at my desk.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Paolo Invernizzi" <paolo.invernizzi gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 17:34:27 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 12:25:44 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi
 wrote:
 Give me a way to writeln the callstack frames at a certain

Challenge accepted: import std.stdio; string getStackTrace() { import core.runtime; version(Posix) { // druntime cuts out the first few functions on the trace as they are internal // so we'll make some dummy functions here so our actual info doesn't get cut Throwable.TraceInfo f5() { return defaultTraceHandler(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f4() { return f5(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f3() { return f4(); } Throwable.TraceInfo f2() { return f3(); } auto stuff = f2(); } else { auto stuff = defaultTraceHandler(); } return stuff.toString(); } void foo() { writeln("on foo"); bar(); } void bar() { writeln("on bar"); omg(); } void omg() { writeln("on omg"); writeln(getStackTrace()); } void main() { omg(); writeln("\n****\n"); foo(); }

O_o Adam, this is *really* an unexpected gift! I suggest to add this example in the core.runtime DDoc at least! - Paolo
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:20:04 -0700
Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:

 On Saturday, September 14, 2013 05:58:51 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 Those exist?
 
 I've long heard stories about such things, but they seem to be like
 unicorns or mermaids or bigfoot...fantasy creatures you only ever
 hear tales "through the grapevine" about. Not so much real evidence
 or first-hand accounts.

Lenovo and Dell certainly used to, but I don't know about right now. One company that's definitely still doing it though is System76 (who is one of the Linux Action Show's sponsors). _All_ of the systems that they build are built specifically for Linux (both desktop and laptop). They don't even sell anything with Windows on it. I always build my own desktops, but the next time that I'm in the market for a laptop, I'll probably end up getting one from them. www.system76.com

Hmm, that sounds awesome, in many ways, but they appear to be very expensive. Their *cheapest* one is over $800. I certainly don't need a full i7. (I'm on a two-core Intel B960 right now, and it's plenty fast for anything I do, The *only* beef I have with it the ridiculous lack of hardware virtualization - so no 64-bit VMs. But there's an even cheaper model now with an AMD IIRC - so that would have the hardware virtualization, and other specs at least as good as my current one, all for less than $300 for the entire machine. An $800 laptop these days would be overkill unless I was doing CG animations, or professional HD video editing/compositing, or something like that...or using Eclipse...) Don't really need the 1080 resolution either since I'm usually on an external monitor - 1080 would make everything way too small on a 15" anyway.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 19:19:16 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
wrote:
 On 2013-09-14 16:42, Peter Alexander wrote:

 What does TextMate do better than Sublime? (genuine question)

* It shows file icons and SCM status in the side bar. * TextMate 2 has built in support for downloading new bundles. With Sublime I need to download some Python thing and run to be able to download new languages

For bundles/packages in Sublime, I recommend everyone install the Package Control package. I'm surprised it's not built-in by now because every package uses it (1559 packages atm) https://sublime.wbond.net/
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:00:35 +0100
Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:

 On Sep 14, 2013 7:21 AM, "Nick Sabalausky" <
 SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:
 Heh, I'm sort of the opposite. I've been using Windows from 3.11
 through 7, and from Vista onward I've started to really hate Windows
 more and more (If I wanted to be running a Mac, I'd have gotten a
 Mac, not two versions of "New Windows: Apple-Envy Edition" followed
 by "Microsoft UI-Of-The-Month Club").

 Meanwhile, I've been using Linux more and more for testing and
 servers, and I'm looking at switching my main OS over to...probably
 Debian 7, with wine and VirtualBox for the occasional things that
 don't come in Linux flavor. I just wish I could get a Linux file
 manager I liked.

It's not as if window's file manager is any good. :o)

It certainly isn't anymore :( It took a nosedive in Vista and then never got any better. And even in XP (and Vista/7, too, and presumably 8) it's terribly inefficient at handling reasonable numbers of files/directories. The cmd prompt can query and display the names/attributes of hundreds of files in the blink of an eye. Why does Explorer often need to sit and wait for several seconds for a even fraction as many? It's not *that* graphically intensive. But I love XP Explorer's UI. (YMMV)
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 17:45:59 +0200
"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:

 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 06:15:08 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
 wrote:
 Heh, I'm sort of the opposite. I've been using Windows from 3.11
 through 7, and from Vista onward I've started to really hate 
 Windows more and more

I kinda love Windows Vista. The little start menu command line rocks and I missed it back on XP.

That thing's not bad, but I hate the new-style "All Programs". And I get frequent use out of the Win-R shortcut anyway.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Saturday, September 14, 2013 21:37:41 Justin Whear wrote:
 Vim has ctags integration, 'gd' for "Go to definition", and :tag
 somefunction/struct/etc
 When working on a big project it can be very nice to start vim
 with:
   $ vim -t someFunction
 
 I usually have a `tags` target in my makefile which uses Dscanner.

When I messed with ctags in the past, I found it to be so primitive that it wasn't worth it. IIRC, it didn't understand enough about C++ to able to properly differentiate between symbols with the same name, and ultimately, it didn't do much better than using grep would have. If it can't jump straight to the correct declaration correctly in pretty much all cases, then it's not worth my time, and it definitely wasn't doing that. I've never tried it with D, but I would generally expect programs like that to do worse with D than with C++. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 21:34:12 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
wrote:
 On 2013-09-14 22:32, Peter Alexander wrote:

 For bundles/packages in Sublime, I recommend everyone install 
 the
 Package Control package. I'm surprised it's not built-in by 
 now because
 every package uses it (1559 packages atm)

 https://sublime.wbond.net/

Yes, that's the one I'm talking about.

Sorry, thought you meant that you had to run a Python script for every package, my bad.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 09:15:35PM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
[...]
 So much work when one could just call the debugger from running code,
 
 http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/f408b4et.aspx
 
 at least on Windows. :)

Well, I haven't used Windows in any significant way for at least a decade, much less did any Windows development, so I think I'll go with Adam Ruppe's solution (which t0t4lly r0x0r5, btw). :-) T -- He who does not appreciate the beauty of language is not worthy to bemoan its flaws.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Peter Williams <pwil3058 bigpond.net.au> writes:
On 14/09/13 14:52, Walter Bright wrote:
 On 9/13/2013 8:48 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 On 9/13/13 4:43 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 On 14 September 2013 00:39, Piotr Szturmaj <bncrbme jadamspam.pl> wrote:
 On 13.09.2013 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try
 this evening VisualD.

Real Programmers magnetize programs directly on a HDD.

Excuse me, but /real/ programmers use Butterflies.

For the few souls who don't yet... http://xkcd.com/378/

I've used punch cards and paper tape. But I refused to use paddle switches.

Programming with paddle switches on a PDP-8 wasn't that hard. Not much different to using a programmable calculator and the available instruction set was small, logically (not randomly) designed and easy to remember. Peter
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 10:30:09 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 02:25:43PM +0200, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
 
 Give me a way to writeln the callstack frames at a certain point,
 and I'll take that: until this, I still need a debugger for
 following the program flow.

I'm pretty sure this is possible with a little effort. [...] Still, if there was a way to print a stacktrace *without* terminating the program, that would be an invaluable addition to our toolset.

Although I haven't actually hit a need to try, can't you just do this?: writeln(new Exception("TRACE")); Or at the very least this: // Or make this a string mixin if you *really* don't // want printStackTrace itself shown in the trace. void printStackTrace() { try throw new Exception("TRACE"); catch(Exception e) writeln(e); }
 
 
 And no, adding a writeln everywhere you call that function is not a
 solution.

True, this is one of the weak points of writeln debugging. Though I usually start from the top-level, so generally by the time I get to a specific function I already know how it got there.

Same here. I writeln-debug the way you'd play that "hi-lo" number guessing game: 1-100: 50 lower 1-100: 25 higher 1-100: 40 higher 1-100: 45 lower 1-100: 43 lower 1-100: 42 It took you that long to guess 42? Really? What kind of nerd are you? Only I make a lot more than one guess at a time.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 19:38:10 +0200
"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:

 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 17:31:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
 I'm pretty sure this is possible with a little effort.

beat you to it! http://forum.dlang.org/thread/fxuwovrirseuatzeeprb forum.dlang.org?page=17#post-jxqobgridgweioqclfqr:40forum.dlang.org
 One trick my coworkers like to use sometimes (with C/C++) is to 
 insert an infinite loop into the program at the suspected 
 problem spot, then at runtime when it reaches 99% CPU

In D, I like to just sprinkle assert(0)'s in places. It actually works pretty well - you can do a binary search of even a fairly large codebase in just a few iterations, then fix up the asserts to actually check what went wrong, and then keep them there later to form sanity checks or unit tests to catch regressions after the bug is fixed.

Assert? That doesn't let you trace the flow. I use this: void trace(string file=__FILE__, size_t line=__LINE__)(string msg="trace") { writefln("%s(%s): %s", file, line, msg); stdout.flush(); } Usage: trace(); foo(); trace(); bar(); trace("-END-"); Output: file.d(1): trace file.d(3): trace file.d(5): -END- For variable watching, I do this: // Using: <https://bitbucket.org/Abscissa/semitwistdtools/src/c7f89f7cd2c086591b544d5bffc536827ae6f763/src/semitwist/util/mixins.d?at=master#cl-103> auto foo = 17; mixin(traceVal!"foo"); Output: foo: 17 I haven't found a way to elimate the "mixin(" part of that one though, which limits its convenience :(
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 21:13:22 +0200
Artur Skawina <art.08.09 gmail.com> wrote:

 On 09/14/13 07:53, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 (And why the freak do I need to re-./configure for every single
 program that needs compiled? Shouldn't something in autotools
 already *know* my system details and not have to re-detect
 *everything* every single time? "Checking X...", "Checking Y...",
 "Is Z sane..."...? Why? Every other damn autotools-based project
 *already* checked those every time I compiled them! It's like
 opening my car door twenty thousand times to make sure "Yup...it's
 still a car!". If certain changes might go unnoticed then fine,
 give me a way to force a re-check if really needed.)

This is a (system) configuration issue. The support for persistent caches is there, it just needs to be enabled. [1] But then /you/ have to deal with invalidating the cache when something changes (which, in theory, means after /every/ sw install or upgrade).

Hmm, you'd think a software install/upgrade would be able to just simply notify the system that it may have affected the X, Y or Z configuration. (Of course *that* could end up going wrong, but still...) Still, good to know that's at least there.
 
 [1] for example, using a /etc/config.site file like:
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 #!/bin/bash
 
 test -z "$SKIP_CONFIG_CACHE" || return 0
 
 if test "$cache_file" = /dev/null -o "$cache_file" = 'config.cache' ;
 then PFIX=`$CC -v 2>&1 | awk ' /version /{ print$1$3"-"$4 }'`
    SFIX=`(set | grep '^ac_.*env' | grep -v '=$' | sort ; uname -mo )
 | sha1sum | cut -f1 -d' '`
 cache_file="/var/cache/config.cache/$PFIX-$SFIX" fi
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeesh. That's why I like D for any non-trivial scripting ;) (Yea, I know, it's all "complain, complain, complain" with me today ;) )
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 05:58:51 -0400
Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:

 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:19:42 +0200
 Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:
 
 The main problem with Linux distributions, is that even in 2013, it 
 won't work properly in laptops.
 
 Wireless chipsets, battery use and graphic cards (specially hybrid
 like optimus) are still a problem.
 

Really? That's all rather discouraging. As of last year, my primary system is now a laptop, and my concern about laptop-related issues was the main reason I ended up sticking with the factory-installed Win7 instead of upgrading back to XP.

Oooh, Score!! According to h-node.org (thanks for the link, Iain), my laptop is already rated "A-platinum": http://h-node.org/notebooks/view/en/1199/X54-C/1/1/Asus/undef/undef/notebook/undef/undef/amd64/undef :)
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 16:05:09 -0700
Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 On 9/14/2013 3:13 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 Plus I seem to be the only Windows user in history who has never
 said "Uhh, ok" to a "Super-helpful web browser toolbar! You'll love
 it! Install now!"

People today keep trying to get me to install this linucks-thingy. "Trust me! It's better than Windows!" Yeah, right :-) I'm probably the only Mac user in history who doesn't find it intuitive and has to constantly google how to do basic things.

Wait, you mean "Mac user who doesn't find *Mac* intuitive"? I spent a year as an OSX guy (way back) and ultimately came to the same conclusion: I couldn't do half of what I wanted without it seeming to fight me at every turn. And it always put up a damn good fight, too. I've used 10.7 since then, and it seems to have only gotten goofier. (At least it's easy to disable the backwards-scrolling.) Even moving the mouse pointer across the screen was (and still is) an effort, no matter what the sensitivity setting. It's no wonder so many Mac users swear by the touchpad - that's the only pointing device where OSX's acceleration is non-broken enough to *let* you move from one end of the screen to the other in *one* motion instead of three or four *and* still be able to hit a button-sized target without surgeon-like hand control.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 03:08:32 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 04:23:35AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 
 Windows (nice):
 % program-cli file.txt
 % program-gui file.txt
 
 Linux (wtf?!):
 % program-cli file.txt
 % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 &

That's only if you don't care about the output of the GUI program, which is usually an indication of errors. Well, unless the GUI program uses one of those stupid chatty toolkits that like to spew EVERYTHING to stdout/stderr, no matter how inane. It violates the rule that programs should be silent by default, and verbose only when asked to be or when an error condition is important enough to warrant soliciting the user's attention. But even then, I usually don't care about these random spews. They can be useful if the GUI program segfaults (which GUI programs are somehow very likely to, for some reason), then you at least have a possibly useful error message. Sending everything into /dev/null by default is a bit counterproductive.

I do agree that being able to access the stdout/err of a GUI is a good thing. I just don't usually care ;), and frankly I think that fact just further underscores my point that launching GUI apps on Linux isn't handled particularly great. Even assuming the usefulness of accessing stdout/err of a GUI, I still don't think plastering it all to the active interactive shell that launched it is a particularly sane default. There's gotta be better ways: Like logging it all (either as opt-in or opt-out logging - I don't care as long as it's consistent.) Or maybe a /proc/stdout/[pid] and /proc/stderr/[pid]. And then maybe a combined /proc/all/stdout. I dunno, something. There's gotta be a better way. Windows knows when a program is GUI or CLI, I think that helps give it a leg up in (potentially) addressing the matter nicely (even if it does currently just throw away all GUI stdout/err, AFAIK). I know situation-specific behaviors are somewhat anti-Unix, but I think GUI vs CLI is significant enough to justify a certain amount of differences (And it's not like Unix doesn't have alternate behaviors where appropriate - ex: some files have finite size and some "files" don't, some are physically on HDD and some aren't. All perfectly justified inconsistencies.) Come to think of it, anyone have any idea if Plan 9 approached this "launching gui apps" any differently than Linux? I'd be curious about that.
 One situation where they can be annoying is when you're switching
 between vim (of course) and the gui program, and the random spewage
 messes up vim's TUI, then the solution is to hit ctrl-L, which *most*
 properly-written TUI programs understand as "something threw up all
 over your terminal, please repaint"

Cool tip! Thanks! I didn't know that. It'll certainly come in handy.
 And if I need to start multiple GUI apps from the same spewage
 terminal, I just ctrl-Z to suspend the first one, 'bg' to background
 it (the afterthought equivalent of &), then start the second app.

You know, I always keep forgetting about "bg". I always remember "fg" because that's how I undo the mistake of hitting Ctrl-Z when I meant Ctrl-C ;) But I keep forgetting I can stuff things into the background after-the-fact. Which is weird - I first learned about "fg/bg" over a decade ago :P
 Or
 better yet, with ratpoison, since it's just two keystrokes to open a
 new terminal, I'd just open a new terminal, start the gui app with
 just a single &, then *kill* that terminal (also just 2 keystrokes in
 ratpoison) so that the OS sends all output to /dev/null for me
 without me ever needing to name /dev/null manually. :) That's 4
 keystrokes compared to that idiotic verbose bash syntax for
 redirecting stdin/stderr to /dev/null (which I'm no fan of, just for
 the record), that takes ... let's see... 15+ keystrokes. Ratpoison
 FTW. :)
 

Ehh, while I'm sure that's easy, it seems like more thought/steps than really *should* be necessary in most cases.
 
 But that's not always right - sometimes you need this instead:
 % gksudo program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 &

GUI programs that need sudo privileges are Teh Evil. I avoid them like the plague. Unless they're the system package manager, but in that case I'd use the CLI equivalents anyway, so this baroque dance is never necessary for me. :-P

Well, I like my GUI-based text editors, and I like to be able to edit configuration files when I need to (not that I like *needing* to). So you do the math ;)
 
 But that's not always right either. On some systems it's:
 % kdesudo program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 &

I have an intense hatred of anything GUI that asks for root privileges. GUI apps are just too fragile, too fat, too crash-prone, to entrust with root privileges.

That may be a fair point. But I've been in the (perhaps bad) habit of running Windows as admin since forever, and it hasn't killed me, so ehh, whatever. ;)
 I have no confidence they will not
 also have nasty bugs that destroys or overwrites system files (a pet
 peeve of mine is gui programs that insist on creating stuff in $HOME
 that isn't their own app-specific dotfile or under their own
 dedicated dotdirectory

Actually, windows apps are pretty bad with that too. Probably even worse since Windows is *supposed* to have at least two separate equivalents to $HOME for each user: - The well-known "My Documents" for files the user *explicitly* creates and saves (equivalent to the non-hidden files in $HOME, and usually something like "C:\Users\{user name}\Documents" on Vista and up) - And a separate %APPDATA% for any data a program implicitly saves (equivalent to the hidden files in $HOME). Settings, game saves, persistent user-specific caches, etc. (Usually something like "C:\Users\{user name}\AppData\Roaming" on Vista and up.) (There's actually more, including a non-roaming machine-specific directory, and a common parent directory of all of them that's unique to the user and ultimately contains *all* the user-centric data...at least the user-centric data that isn't in the registry. But those two above are the real key ones.) But a lot of windows programs just spew all their shit into the user-centric "My Documents" instead of "%APPDATA%/AppFooBar" where it all belongs. Even Microsoft's own Visual Studio does this (unless they've fixed it - they apparently change everything in every version anyway). So then *MY* *DOCUMENTS* gets cluttered with random shit I know perfectly well *I* didn't create. So I have to create a "MyDocs" subdirectory to use as my *real* "My Documents". But I can't tell Windows it's my real "My Documents" or everything will start spamming that directory instead (Unless the program is *really* poorly behaved and hard-codes something like "C:\Users\{user name}\Documents", though I don't know how rare/common that is.) Ugh...I don't know how I managed to learn that much random shit about Windows...<g>
 Of course, Linux *also* provides many ways to do it *wrong*, which
 are naturally more convenient:
 

None of this are an issue if you've a fast way to starting up / switching to a specific terminal dedicated for containing spewage. :)

Yea, but then you have to actually *do* that ;)
 (Of course, the fact the majority of gui programs love spewing like
 this is a sign of a fundamental pathology common to such programs,
 but that belongs in another rant. :-P

They appear to use stdout/err as a logfile. I guess that could be convenient during development, but...ugh.
 It's one of the many reasons I
 have an aversion to all things GUI. In fact, in *my* book, a proper
 GUI program should automatically detach itself from the terminal at
 startup -- there are well-known, standard ways of doing this, but
 alas, most GUI developers don't care enough to do it.)
 

I would buy that book ;) Actually though, do you have a link regarding that auto-detaching?
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 13:41:48 +0200
"deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> wrote:
 
 You are either dishonest or a complete morron. By respect for 
 you, I'll pick the first one.

Huh? Is there some user-spoofing going on here?
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 17:08:56 +0200
"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> wrote:

 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 23:56:26 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
 wrote:
 Personally, I find the Windows/DOS
 shell to be completely unusable and use git-bash when I'm

cmd.exe is indeed painful to use. I blame it's weird history and tab completion. It has them so you want to use it.... but they are weird.

I think they help make cmd.exe usable, but you're right, they are weird. And limited. The history does at least seem to have a certain logic to it, but in practice I usually find it more confusing than bash's or, uhhh, whatever BSD's default shell is. In fact, after I got over my initial shock (only a few minutes), I started to grock the logic of BSD's shell history, and I'm starting to like it more than bash's history. So easy to call up the command you want, even if it's old: Just type the beginning and then "up/down" automatically filters to that prefix. Nice. The redirection system has some interesting points too, although I'm not familiar enough with that aspect yet (as opposed to bash) to really judge it.
 The commands don't bother me, the different quoting and (lack 
 of?) looping don't bother me - I prefer to just use D for 
 anything more than a line or three of shell anyway - but the 
 history and compleition are really annoying.
 

Yea. And as far as the commands go, it's easy enough to install the Windows port of all the basic Gnu tools. So I can tee stuff, and pipe to grep and such just as well on Windows as I can on Linux. And piping/redirection works fine on cmd.exe, pretty much identical to bash actually. So I'm actually fairly comfortable on the Windows command line, all things considered. My biggest beefs are that I can't resize the terminal's width or copy-paste without the mouse, but there's a million alternate front-ends to cmd.exe which do that stuff just fine. I even have a couple installed, I'm just too lazy to change my habit of always reaching for cmd.exe ;)
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 12:42:45 +0100
Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> wrote:

 On Sat, 2013-09-14 at 09:53 +0100, Russel Winder wrote:
 [=E2=80=A6]
 OK Vim beats Emacs on that one, for Emacs it Esc 1 2 Ctrl+Down, 4
 keystrokes.

Of course Vim is completely unusable since it relies on using monospace fonts, where everyone one knows that reading is best done with proportional fonts. =20 <yes-this-is-a-bit-of-an-intentional-troll/> =20 :-) =20 =20

Actually, there's a way to make proportional fonts work just fine for code: http://nickgravgaard.com/elastictabstops/ I'm totally sold on the idea of elastic tabstops. I just wish Scintilla would support them so I can actually *use* them in my editor.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 13:49:43 +0200
"Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:

 I never thought that this becomes a discussion about windows 
 versus linux. :o

I never thought I'd see an OS debate that wasn't a flamewar!
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 10:18:45 -0700
Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:

 On Saturday, September 14, 2013 10:11:59 H. S. Teoh wrote:
 Nah, it's still too rainbow-y for me. I still prefer no syntax
 highlighting.

Whereas I would feel almost like I was walking around blind if there were no syntax highlighting. I can certainly read code without syntax highlighting, but it's much harder. To each their own I guess.

I feel colorblind without highlighting. I know that sounds like a bad joke (and feel free to take it that way ;) ), but it really does make me feel full-colorblind.
Sep 14 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Johannes Pfau <nospam example.com> writes:
Am Sat, 14 Sep 2013 21:52:52 +0200
schrieb Artur Skawina <art.08.09 gmail.com>:

 On 09/14/13 21:15, Paulo Pinto wrote:
 So much work when one could just call the debugger from running
 code,
 
 http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/f408b4et.aspx
 
 at least on Windows. :)

// version (x86|x86_64) enum __debugbreak = q{asm { "int $3"; }}; void main() { import std.stdio; auto a = 42; writeln(a); mixin (__debugbreak); writeln(a); } $ gdc -O3 -g explbp.d -o explbp $ gdb ./explbp (gdb) run 42

version(GNU) { import gcc.builtins; __builtin_trap(); } Portable, but you can't continue the program as with int 3. GCC really needs a __builtin_break. There's also version(Posix) { import core.sys.posix.signal; raise(SIGTRAP); } which allows to continue the program. The breakpoint is in the C raise function in libpthread however and not in main as with your mixin.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--047d7b5daca01188b104e6690757
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 15, 2013 12:10 AM, "Walter Bright" <newshound2 digitalmars.com>
wrote:
 On 9/14/2013 3:13 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 Plus I seem to be the only Windows user in history who has never said
 "Uhh, ok" to a "Super-helpful web browser toolbar! You'll love it!
 Install now!"

People today keep trying to get me to install this linucks-thingy. "Trust

 I'm probably the only Mac user in history who doesn't find it intuitive


I wouldn't say better, but it is a rich environment of functionality and development. Also Linux isn't trying to spy on you, isn't constantly phoning home to Redmond, and isn't sending your fingerprints to the NSA. :-) Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --047d7b5daca01188b104e6690757 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 15, 2013 12:10 AM, &quot;Walter Bright&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:n= ewshound2 digitalmars.com">newshound2 digitalmars.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On 9/14/2013 3:13 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:<br> &gt;&gt;<br> &gt;&gt; Plus I seem to be the only Windows user in history who has never s= aid<br> &gt;&gt; &quot;Uhh, ok&quot; to a &quot;Super-helpful web browser toolbar! = You&#39;ll love it!<br> &gt;&gt; Install now!&quot;<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; People today keep trying to get me to install this linucks-thingy. &qu= ot;Trust me! It&#39;s better than Windows!&quot; Yeah, right :-)<br> &gt;<br> &gt; I&#39;m probably the only Mac user in history who doesn&#39;t find it = intuitive and has to constantly google how to do basic things.<br> &gt;</p> <p>I wouldn&#39;t say better, but it is a rich environment of functionality= and development.=A0 Also Linux isn&#39;t trying to spy on you, isn&#39;t c= onstantly phoning home to Redmond, and isn&#39;t sending your fingerprints = to the NSA.=A0=A0 :-)<br> </p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;</p> --047d7b5daca01188b104e6690757--
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:38:09 +0200
Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:

 On 2013-09-14 10:23, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 While I definitely prefer bash to the windows prompt overall, there
 are some places where I think windows makes the linux cmdline look
 bad. Like launching a GUI program instead of a CLI:

 Windows (nice):
 % program-cli file.txt
 % program-gui file.txt

 Linux (wtf?!):
 % program-cli file.txt
 % program-gui file.txt >/dev/null 2>%1 &

On Mac OS X I usually use "open" command to open a file in the default application. $ open file.txt

Windows actually does the same thing, except the filename *is* the command: $ file.txt And yea, either way, "open file.txt" or "file.txt", it is kinda nice. Although I find I use it very rarely, oddly enough.
 Or I can explicitly specify the application:
 
 open -a /Applications/TextEdit.app foo.txt
 

Hmm. What's the benefit over just doing this?: $ /Applications/TextEdit.app foo.txt
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 10:51:11 +0100
Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:
 
 I wouldn't say better, but it is a rich environment of functionality
 and development.  Also Linux isn't trying to spy on you, isn't
 constantly phoning home to Redmond, and isn't sending your
 fingerprints to the NSA. :-)
 

That's what Linus *wants* you to think! (...or at least that's what she said anyway...)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Paolo Invernizzi" <paolo.invernizzi gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 09:51:22 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:

<snip>

 and isn't sending your fingerprints to  the NSA.
 :-)

 Regards

Being an european, and having traveled to the US, my fingerprints are _already_ in the NSA archives... ;-/ /P
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--001a11c21cc692d5ee04e6698422
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 15, 2013 10:55 AM, "Nick Sabalausky" <
SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:
 On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 10:51:11 +0100
 Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:
 I wouldn't say better, but it is a rich environment of functionality
 and development.  Also Linux isn't trying to spy on you, isn't
 constantly phoning home to Redmond, and isn't sending your
 fingerprints to the NSA. :-)

That's what Linus *wants* you to think! (...or at least that's what she said anyway...)

That's got to be the worst twss I've ever had the misfortune to read. :) Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --001a11c21cc692d5ee04e6698422 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 15, 2013 10:55 AM, &quot;Nick Sabalausky&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto= :SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com">SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com</= a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 10:51:11 +0100<br> &gt; Iain Buclaw &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:ibuclaw ubuntu.com">ibuclaw ubuntu.c= om</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; I wouldn&#39;t say better, but it is a rich environment of functi= onality<br> &gt; &gt; and development. =A0Also Linux isn&#39;t trying to spy on you, is= n&#39;t<br> &gt; &gt; constantly phoning home to Redmond, and isn&#39;t sending your<br=

&gt; &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; That&#39;s what Linus *wants* you to think! (...or at least that&#39;s= what<br> &gt; she said anyway...)<br> &gt;</p> <p>That&#39;s got to be the worst twss I&#39;ve ever had the misfortune to = read. :)<br></p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;</p> --001a11c21cc692d5ee04e6698422--
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 12:06:15 +0200
Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:

 On 2013-09-15 04:58, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 
 Even moving the mouse pointer across the screen was (and still is)
 an effort, no matter what the sensitivity setting. It's no wonder
 so many Mac users swear by the touchpad - that's the only pointing
 device where OSX's acceleration is non-broken enough to *let* you
 move from one end of the screen to the other in *one* motion
 instead of three or four *and* still be able to hit a button-sized
 target without surgeon-like hand control.

Apple have never been good at creating computer mice. I'm using a Logitech MX 510 mouse. I can move the cursor across two 24" displays in one motion. No problems.

Really? That's weird: I plugged the actual Logitech trackball I always use on Win/Lin into my brother's OSX 10.7 MacBook, and it took on average 3 full "thumb movements" (trackball equivalent to moving the mouse without lifting it) to get from one side of the screen to the other. I've never had trouble going that distance in Windows or Linux with only around 1 full thumb movement. I tried adjusting the sensitivity (the only mouse sensitivity option it seemed to have), but by the time I could get across the screen in around one movement, it was so hyper-sensitive I could barely hit any specific target without overshooting it a few times. My old 10.2 eMac had always been the same way, too. His touchpad, OTOH, was just like on my laptop: Across most of the screen in one big swipe, but still able to do finer-grained movements (at least as well as you can ever do that on a touchpad anyway - admittedly the newer ones are MUCH better than a few years ago, but still not quite mouse/trackball quality...but that's an entirely different matter).
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 12:08:41 +0200
Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:

 On 2013-09-15 02:09, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 
 Assert? That doesn't let you trace the flow. I use this:

 void trace(string file=__FILE__, size_t line=__LINE__)(string
 msg="trace") {
          writefln("%s(%s): %s", file, line, msg);
          stdout.flush();
 }

If you use runtime arguments you'll avoid template bloat: void trace(string msg="trace", string file=__FILE__, size_t line=__LINE__)

Cool, I didn't know __FILE__/__LINE__ worked as default runtime args. IIRC, they didn't used to (but maybe that was just in D1 where they didn't work as default template args either).
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Sunday, September 15, 2013 06:40:36 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 12:08:41 +0200
 
 Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:
 On 2013-09-15 02:09, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 Assert? That doesn't let you trace the flow. I use this:
 
 void trace(string file=__FILE__, size_t line=__LINE__)(string
 msg="trace") {
 
          writefln("%s(%s): %s", file, line, msg);
          stdout.flush();
 
 }

If you use runtime arguments you'll avoid template bloat: void trace(string msg="trace", string file=__FILE__, size_t line=__LINE__)

Cool, I didn't know __FILE__/__LINE__ worked as default runtime args. IIRC, they didn't used to (but maybe that was just in D1 where they didn't work as default template args either).

They have worked as default runtime arguments for quite a long time. That's what all the exception classes use to get their file and line number. I'm not aware of them ever not working as default arguments, but I never used D1, and I certainly don't remember all of the changes early in D2. On a related note, I find it very annoying that in C++, when using __FILE__ and __LINE__ as default arguments, it takes the declaration site rather than the call site. It's really a great innovation of D that they get filled in at the call site in D. In any case, using __FILE__ or __LINE__ as a default template argument is almost always a bad idea, because it makes it so that you end up with a new template instantiation pretty much every time you use it, which is going to cause a ridiculous amount of code bloat if the template is used much at all. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:26:16 +0100
Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:

 On Sep 15, 2013 10:55 AM, "Nick Sabalausky" <
 SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:
 On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 10:51:11 +0100
 Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:
 I wouldn't say better, but it is a rich environment of
 functionality and development.  Also Linux isn't trying to spy on
 you, isn't constantly phoning home to Redmond, and isn't sending
 your fingerprints to the NSA. :-)

That's what Linus *wants* you to think! (...or at least that's what she said anyway...)

That's got to be the worst twss I've ever had the misfortune to read. :)

Usually I do my "twss to things that make no sense" in voice, but then the NG doesn't get to enjoy it! Or at least that's what she wanted them to say... (I also like combining them in terrible ways. Fun, fun, fun...)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--047d7b6732f89579c204e669fb3a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 15, 2013 11:50 AM, "Jacob Carlborg" <doob me.com> wrote:
 On 2013-09-15 11:51, Iain Buclaw wrote:

 I wouldn't say better, but it is a rich environment of functionality and
 development.  Also Linux isn't trying to spy on you, isn't constantly
 phoning home to Redmond, and isn't sending your fingerprints to the
 NSA.   :-)

No, it's phoning home to Google, in the form of Android :)

Now we are getting into the strict differences between Android/Linux and GNU/Linux. The kernel may be the pudding, but it's the user space system running on top that has it's finger on the trigger. Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --047d7b6732f89579c204e669fb3a Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 15, 2013 11:50 AM, &quot;Jacob Carlborg&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:= doob me.com">doob me.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On 2013-09-15 11:51, Iain Buclaw wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt;&gt; I wouldn&#39;t say better, but it is a rich environment of functio= nality and<br> &gt;&gt; development. =A0Also Linux isn&#39;t trying to spy on you, isn&#39= ;t constantly<br> &gt;&gt; phoning home to Redmond, and isn&#39;t sending your fingerprints t= o the<br> &gt;&gt; NSA. =A0 :-)<br> &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; No, it&#39;s phoning home to Google, in the form of Android :)<br> &gt;</p> <p>Now we are getting into the strict differences between Android/Linux and= GNU/Linux.=A0 The kernel may be the pudding, but it&#39;s the user space s= ystem running on top that has it&#39;s finger on the trigger.</p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;</p> --047d7b6732f89579c204e669fb3a--
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 12:46:29 +0200
Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:

 On 2013-09-15 11:52, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 
 Windows actually does the same thing, except the filename *is* the
 command:

 $ file.txt

 And yea, either way, "open file.txt" or "file.txt", it is kinda
 nice. Although I find I use it very rarely, oddly enough.

I mostly use "open" to open a directory in the file browser: $ open . That's especially useful when opening hidden folders.

Yea, that one I picked up a few weeks ago when I first tried to test the release builder script on OSX. I couldn't for the life of me figure out how to get Finder to show the temp directory, so a little bit of web searching led me to that. But I didn't know it worked for files, too. The windows version is (for directories only): $ explorer .
 Hmm. What's the benefit over just doing this?:

 $ /Applications/TextEdit.app foo.txt

$ /Applications/TextEdit.app foo.txt -bash: /Applications/TextEdit.app: Is a directory .app "files" are bundles, that is, directories which Finder and other tools treat specially. The actual executable is located at /Applications/TextEdit.app/Contents/MacOS/TextEdit

Ahh, ok. I knew about bundles, but I didn't know the command line didn't do the same special handling for them, too.
 In the case of TextEdit, running:
 
 $ /Applications/TextEdit.app/Contents/MacOS/TextEdit foo.txt
 
 Will complain that foo.txt doesn't exist. The shell will also wait
 until the application terminates. Running through "open" the shell
 will not wait for the application and it will open the document
 properly.
 

I see, that's interesting. So it does have a special way to launch an app asynchronously without the "&" at the end of the command line. Does it also gag stdout/stderr? Am I correct in assuming "open" is specifically an OSX thing, and not something inherited from BSD?
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:59:33 +0100
Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:

 On Sep 15, 2013 11:50 AM, "Jacob Carlborg" <doob me.com> wrote:
 On 2013-09-15 11:51, Iain Buclaw wrote:

 I wouldn't say better, but it is a rich environment of
 functionality and development.  Also Linux isn't trying to spy on
 you, isn't constantly phoning home to Redmond, and isn't sending
 your fingerprints to the NSA.   :-)

No, it's phoning home to Google, in the form of Android :)

Now we are getting into the strict differences between Android/Linux and GNU/Linux. The kernel may be the pudding, but it's the user space system running on top that has it's finger on the trigger.

Wait, pudding that has a trigger? Either this conversation is getting strange, or I'm getting sleepy ;)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
--001a11c2be66b6e6e304e66ac679
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sep 15, 2013 12:20 PM, "Nick Sabalausky" <
SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:
 On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:59:33 +0100
 Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:

 On Sep 15, 2013 11:50 AM, "Jacob Carlborg" <doob me.com> wrote:
 On 2013-09-15 11:51, Iain Buclaw wrote:

 I wouldn't say better, but it is a rich environment of
 functionality and development.  Also Linux isn't trying to spy on
 you, isn't constantly phoning home to Redmond, and isn't sending
 your fingerprints to the NSA.   :-)

No, it's phoning home to Google, in the form of Android :)

Now we are getting into the strict differences between Android/Linux and GNU/Linux. The kernel may be the pudding, but it's the user space system running on top that has it's finger on the trigger.

Wait, pudding that has a trigger?

Have you not heard of the custard plant that melted down in 82? I hear children are still being born with FLAN feet.
 Either this conversation is getting strange, or I'm getting sleepy ;)

I think sleepy. ;) Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; --001a11c2be66b6e6e304e66ac679 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p><br> On Sep 15, 2013 12:20 PM, &quot;Nick Sabalausky&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto= :SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com">SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com</= a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:59:33 +0100<br> &gt; Iain Buclaw &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:ibuclaw ubuntu.com">ibuclaw ubuntu.c= om</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; On Sep 15, 2013 11:50 AM, &quot;Jacob Carlborg&quot; &lt;<a href= =3D"mailto:doob me.com">doob me.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; On 2013-09-15 11:51, Iain Buclaw wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;&gt; I wouldn&#39;t say better, but it is a rich environment = of<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;&gt; functionality and development. =A0Also Linux isn&#39;t t= rying to spy on<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;&gt; you, isn&#39;t constantly phoning home to Redmond, and i= sn&#39;t sending<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;&gt; your fingerprints to the NSA. =A0 :-)<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; No, it&#39;s phoning home to Google, in the form of Android = :)<br> &gt; &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt; &gt; Now we are getting into the strict differences between Android/Li= nux<br> &gt; &gt; and GNU/Linux. =A0The kernel may be the pudding, but it&#39;s the= user<br> &gt; &gt; space system running on top that has it&#39;s finger on the trigg= er.<br> &gt; &gt;<br> &gt;<br> &gt; Wait, pudding that has a trigger? </p> <p>Have you not heard of the custard plant that melted down in 82?=A0 I hea= r children are still being born with FLAN feet. </p> <p>&gt; Either this conversation is getting strange, or I&#39;m getting sle= epy ;)<br> &gt;</p> <p>I think sleepy. ;)</p> <p>Regards<br> -- <br> Iain Buclaw</p> <p>*(p &lt; e ? p++ : p) =3D (c &amp; 0x0f) + &#39;0&#39;;</p> --001a11c2be66b6e6e304e66ac679--
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh gmail.com> writes:
+1 for Sublime to stay on topic

OT:

I couldn't read the whole thread but...
I wish to see this kind of burning passion during the Phobos code reviews ;)

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Johannes Pfau <nospam example.com> writes:
Am Sun, 15 Sep 2013 13:56:52 +0200
schrieb Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com>:

 Yes, from the man page:
 
 HISTORY
       First appeared in NextStep.
 
 https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man1/open.1.html
 

There's xdg-open for linux though, which works in exactly the same way.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Ivan Kazmenko" <gassa mail.ru> writes:
On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

FAR Manager's editor with Colorer plugin. The upside is that it's a unified (albeit minimalistic) interface for every language I decide to write in. And sometimes CodeBlocks for larger projects. Ivan Kazmenko.
Sep 15 2013
parent Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh gmail.com> writes:
15-Sep-2013 18:48, Vladimir Panteleev пишет:
 On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 14:10:58 UTC, Ivan Kazmenko wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will
 try this evening VisualD.

FAR Manager's editor with Colorer plugin. The upside is that it's a unified (albeit minimalistic) interface for every language I decide to write in.

I thought I was the only one :)

I use it more as a better console ;) -- Dmitry Olshansky
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net> writes:
On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 14:10:58 UTC, Ivan Kazmenko wrote:
 On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this evening VisualD.

FAR Manager's editor with Colorer plugin. The upside is that it's a unified (albeit minimalistic) interface for every language I decide to write in.

I thought I was the only one :)
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 10:32:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
 My understanding (purely from the link below) was that 
 /usr/local/* was
 *specifically* for non-package-managered stuff, whereas /usr/* 
 was
 *specifically* for package-managered things:

 http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/8656/usr-bin-vs-usr-local-bin-on-linux

Not entirely true. You should never have anything not managed by package manager on Linux system, it is a reliable road to disaster. Better distinction is "/usr/" for packages from official repos, "/usr/local" for own custom packages.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On 13/09/13 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try this
 evening VisualD.

Vim, on Ubuntu. :-) The actual reason is rather trivial. I've always favoured a mixed tab-space indent style for code ("tabs for indentation, spaces for alignment"), as described here: http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/SmartTabs Unfortunately, most text editors don't seem to support this very well any more. In KDE 3 both Kate and KDevelop used to support it well, but since KDE 4 came out it seems to have been dropped. If you search "mixed tab-space indentation" you'll even come across a rather forlorn post of mine from the time on the Ubuntu Forums trying to sort this out: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1475867 Vim and Emacs seem to be the only editors where it's readily possible to implement this these days, and vim is easier to use, so it wound up being the only choice. The irony is that given that standard D style is a 4-space indent, these days I've turned off the mixed tab-space style, for D at least ... but I'm still using vim, and I even find myself accidentally hitting vim-style commands if I use another editor to code. I did go through a period of using CodeBlocks for my official D contributions, with the 4-space style, and vim for my private projects, with mixed tab-space style; but eventually I decided, OK, D style is D style, follow the standard in all cases, and just went to vim for everything. I still do mixed tab-space for C/C++ though. Yes, I know. Burn the witch. :-)
Sep 15 2013
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-15 22:49, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 I actually did the same tab/space thing for awhile. But my editors
 didn't really have a native understanding of it so it became manual
 editing of invisible characters, so now I just avoid that style of
 alignment regardless of tabs or spaces. Ie, instead of:

 foobar(aaaaa, bbbbb, ccccc,
         dddd, eeeee, fffff);

 I'll just do:

 foobar(
      aaaaa, bbbbb, ccccc,
      dddd, eeeee, fffff
 );

 Not as pretty, but it works, it makes things simpler, Plus it avoids
 the former style's tendency to wind up with gigantically-sized indents.

I recently watch the Going Native talk by Chandler. He talks about the one of the biggest problem they have at Google. It's not the language (C++) itself, but it's formatting whitespace. Short, they have a tool for that now. http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/GoingNative/2013/The-Care-and-Feeding-of-C-s-Dragons -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-09-16 08:53, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I recently watch the Going Native talk by Chandler. He talks about the
 one of the biggest problem they have at Google. It's not the language
 (C++) itself, but it's formatting whitespace. Short, they have a tool
 for that now.

 http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/GoingNative/2013/The-Care-and-Feeding-of-C-s-Dragons

Forgot to say, it automatically solves your problem. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 13:56:52 +0200
Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:

 On 2013-09-15 13:12, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 
 The windows version is (for directories only):
 $ explorer .

Didn't know about that.

I didn't either until I tried it a few seconds before writing that ;) But I had a hunch!
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 19:18:14 +0200
Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> wrote:

 On 13/09/13 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will
 try this evening VisualD.

Vim, on Ubuntu. :-) The actual reason is rather trivial. I've always favoured a mixed tab-space indent style for code ("tabs for indentation, spaces for alignment"), as described here: http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/SmartTabs

I love that comic! I actually did the same tab/space thing for awhile. But my editors didn't really have a native understanding of it so it became manual editing of invisible characters, so now I just avoid that style of alignment regardless of tabs or spaces. Ie, instead of: foobar(aaaaa, bbbbb, ccccc, dddd, eeeee, fffff); I'll just do: foobar( aaaaa, bbbbb, ccccc, dddd, eeeee, fffff ); Not as pretty, but it works, it makes things simpler, Plus it avoids the former style's tendency to wind up with gigantically-sized indents.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 12:53:24AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 03:08:32 -0700
 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 It's one of the many reasons I have an aversion to all things GUI.
 In fact, in *my* book, a proper GUI program should automatically
 detach itself from the terminal at startup -- there are well-known,
 standard ways of doing this, but alas, most GUI developers don't
 care enough to do it.)
 

I would buy that book ;) Actually though, do you have a link regarding that auto-detaching?

Well... it's actually very simple: int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { if (fork()==0) { /* debugMode gets all the spewage, since * presumably the GUI developer actually cares * about that stuff. */ if (!debugMode) { /* Swallow all spewage */ fclose(stdin); fclose(stdout); fclose(stderr); } /* GUI code doesn't need to run in terminal */ startGui(); } /* So return control back to shell immediately. */ exit(0); } :) Though, granted, you probably want to reopen stdin/stdout/stderr (possibly as /dev/null) in case something chokes on errors caused by writing to a closed file descriptor. But in C, nobody cares about the return code of printf anyway, so this is mostly a non-issue. (Of course, Unix does have a few dark corners, and here is one of them that catches most people unaware. Consider what happens after you call fclose on stdin/stdout/stderr. Unix, by convention, assigns them to file descriptors 0, 1, and 2. Since they are now closed, if you then open other resource files, say, a database file (via whatever DB library you're using), it gets assigned the lowest unused file descriptor, that is, 0, then 1, etc.. Now consider what happens when there are random printf's scattered all over the code, and you're unlucky enough to have your DB file's fd assigned to 1.) T -- First Rule of History: History doesn't repeat itself -- historians merely repeat each other.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 05:04:43PM +0400, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
 +1 for Sublime to stay on topic
 
 OT:
 
 I couldn't read the whole thread but...
 I wish to see this kind of burning passion during the Phobos code
 reviews ;)

+1. We need more Phobos reviewers (and that includes *everyone*... as people have said before, you don't need commit privilege to review, anyone can leave comments on the pull requests -- and we need all the extra eyes we can get). T -- "I'm running Windows '98." "Yes." "My computer isn't working now." "Yes, you already said that." -- User-Friendly
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 04:49:58PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 19:18:14 +0200
 Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> wrote:
 
 On 13/09/13 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will
 try this evening VisualD.

Vim, on Ubuntu. :-) The actual reason is rather trivial. I've always favoured a mixed tab-space indent style for code ("tabs for indentation, spaces for alignment"), as described here: http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/SmartTabs

I love that comic! I actually did the same tab/space thing for awhile. But my editors didn't really have a native understanding of it so it became manual editing of invisible characters, so now I just avoid that style of alignment regardless of tabs or spaces. Ie, instead of: foobar(aaaaa, bbbbb, ccccc, dddd, eeeee, fffff); I'll just do: foobar( aaaaa, bbbbb, ccccc, dddd, eeeee, fffff ); Not as pretty,

I disagree. I think it's prettier. :) The first style above has the disadvantage that the exact amount of indentation is usually a non-integral multiple of the indent size of the rest of the code, which I find jarring.
 but it works, it makes things simpler, Plus it avoids the former
 style's tendency to wind up with gigantically-sized indents.

Yeah... I'm torn between the two. The first style saves vertical space, which is important to me, but the second style makes more sense IMO, plus it lets you format complicated nested expressions in a nicer way, i.e.: foobar( isNumber(x) ? aVeryLongNestedExpression : anotherVeryLongNestedExpression, isIdent(y) ? yetAnotherVeryLongExpression : guessWhatAnotherLongExpression, ( (x*x + y*y)^^2 + (z*z + w*w)^^2 + 2.0*( sin(x+y-z)^^2 + cos(x-y+z)^^2 ) ) - ( 3.0*( tan(x+y+z)^^2 + sec(x-y-z)^^2 ) ), (real x, real y) { return ( someConvolutedCode(x) + moreConvolutedCode(y) ) - ( hahaImHavingFun(x+y) + makingUpStuff(x-y) ); } ); T -- Once the bikeshed is up for painting, the rainbow won't suffice. -- Andrei Alexandrescu
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 17:14:19 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 10:32:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
 wrote:
 My understanding (purely from the link below) was that 
 /usr/local/* was
 *specifically* for non-package-managered stuff, whereas /usr/* 
 was
 *specifically* for package-managered things:

 http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/8656/usr-bin-vs-usr-local-bin-on-linux

Not entirely true. You should never have anything not managed by package manager on Linux system, it is a reliable road to disaster. Better distinction is "/usr/" for packages from official repos, "/usr/local" for own custom packages.

I stick them in /opt/somthing usually, but the idea is the same.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 17:18:21 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:
 On 13/09/13 21:48, Namespace wrote:
 Just out of interest.

 I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I 
 will try this
 evening VisualD.

Vim, on Ubuntu. :-) The actual reason is rather trivial. I've always favoured a mixed tab-space indent style for code ("tabs for indentation, spaces for alignment"), as described here: http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/SmartTabs Unfortunately, most text editors don't seem to support this very well any more. In KDE 3 both Kate and KDevelop used to support it well, but since KDE 4 came out it seems to have been dropped. If you search "mixed tab-space indentation" you'll even come across a rather forlorn post of mine from the time on the Ubuntu Forums trying to sort this out: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1475867 Vim and Emacs seem to be the only editors where it's readily possible to implement this these days, and vim is easier to use, so it wound up being the only choice. The irony is that given that standard D style is a 4-space indent, these days I've turned off the mixed tab-space style, for D at least ... but I'm still using vim, and I even find myself accidentally hitting vim-style commands if I use another editor to code. I did go through a period of using CodeBlocks for my official D contributions, with the 4-space style, and vim for my private projects, with mixed tab-space style; but eventually I decided, OK, D style is D style, follow the standard in all cases, and just went to vim for everything. I still do mixed tab-space for C/C++ though. Yes, I know. Burn the witch. :-)

What do you use to do that in vim ? All my attempts did fail.
Sep 15 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "PauloPinto" <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 06:54:21 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
wrote: