Re: Programming "efficiently" on given hardware - what does it mean really?

From: Randy Howard (randyhoward_at_FOOverizonBAR.net)
Date: 06/30/04 

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 06:34:31 GMT

In article <32f4e0luu9jol72edju59hk28lufl9cdpa@4ax.com>, Chris@Sonnack.com
says...
> In a GUI environment, use a RAD tool to whip up a quick, simple UI
> that allows you to create, edit & store command lines, AND provides
> you with a pick list and--once you pick one--pre-editor so you can
> tweak the command prior to launch.

Up arrow, aliases, and a few properly written scripts are a lot
simpler (and easier to migrate from one box to another). I tend to
keep everything I need on a Samba share, then mount it either from
Windows or Linux and add the appropriate places to the path. No
problem, everything I need is there, and no registry problems to
worry about. Try mounting a drive with an MS gui application on it
and running it on a machine without redoing the install.

Also, I tend to touch 40+ machines a day when working lately, either
directly or remote over a network. Having to install a GUI RAD
tool (or it's offspring) on each of those machines before doing anything
would be a major pain in the ***.

> Closest you could come in a command line environment would be one
> of those horrid prompt/response text apps, or maybe something ugly
> in curses (and apt name, I always thought).

Strange, I wouldn't bother. I can type it on the command line faster
than you can fire up a GUI and clickety clickety some virtual command
line together. Then, you'll suddenly realize that perl isn't installed
on your windows box yet, and neither is grep, and suddenly ...

> But,... I can't remember the last time I needed, or thought I needed,
> a pipeline.

I use it quite a lot, but I do a lot of work automating things, so it
makes a lot more sense to use it when the toolbox has the right shaped
wrenches in it already than to write a whole new app to do what can
be done in 30 seconds or less from the shell. *IF* it was run often
enough that the runtime cost became noticeable, then I'd reconsider.

> In apps I know, I fly. With commandlines I know, I fly.

Makes sense. I know one guy that can practically make Excel do the
Macarena. For his job (he's a CFO), I'm sure that's a really cool
thing to be good at. For my $2, I'd rather slit my wrists than use
excel all day. Fortunately, he's happy at his work, and so am I.

> > Getting windows configured with all the stuff you need to be productive
> > from the command line can take days to accomplish though.
>
> Well, sure, you're fighting the paradigm. (-:

Actually, I'm fighting the assimilation. I prefer the option to do *both*,
rather than to be told how to use my own computer by some "GUI Evangelist"
from Microsoft. I assume everybody here probably knows that MS actually
has a large number of employees with the word "Evangelist" in their job
title and on their business cards. I've collected a fair number of them
over the years. It cracks me up. And they say it's not a religious
argument. :-)

Lately, I'm considering moving to Crossover Office (www.codeweavers.com) and
blowing off the Windows OS completely while still being able to run those
few pesky windows apps when I need to.

> And consider this: another way to look at this is that commandline apps
> NEED good docs, because they are so hard to (learn to) use.

To reword an old joke, the command line is very user friendly, it's just
highly selective about who it makes friends with. I guess it doesn't
like you. :-) 

-- 
Randy Howard    (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"The most amazing achievement of the computer software industry is its
continuing cancellation of the steady and staggering gains made by the
computer hardware industry..."   - Henry Petroski