From: tomster@banzai.WPI.EDU (Thomas Richard Dibble)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More Defense of CLI  (there, I changed the subject ... )
Date: 1 Oct 92 03:13:48 GMT
	<6082.2ac8918b@hayes.com> <17682@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609-2280
NNTP-Posting-Host: banzai.wpi.edu
In-reply-to: putzolu@toadflax.cs.ucdavis.edu's message of 30 Sep 92 05:59:11 GMT

In article <17682@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> putzolu@toadflax.cs.ucdavis.edu (David Putzolu) writes:

   In article <6082.2ac8918b@hayes.com> bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:
   >In article <TOMSTER.92Sep28222039@bigwpi.WPI.EDU>, tomster@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Thomas Richard Dibble) writes:
   >>    > happier with a GUI. I as a programmer would be VERY unhappy if I just
   >>    > had a GUI.
   >> 
   >>    I have a surprise. I'm a programmer.
   >> 
   >> I feel sorry for you, really I do.
   >
   >I fail to see why.

Then let me expand on what I meant, and why I personally would rather program
in DOS.  First, I am talking about programming for the environment, not
the environment for the programming.  Hell, you could be writing your Mac
programs in DOS Edit and compiling them with a UNIX Make for all I cared 
(though I don't think the UNIX make will like a Mac program very much ...).
The point is that you have to deal with message spools, etc, of another
person's making.  Programming in DOS, yes, it is useful to set up spools,
etc (though they are used for very different things), but if you don't
like the way a certain spool handles itself, you can always change it so that
it is optimized to task.
Again, I don't program for a Mac.  I have programmed for Windows, and
have found it to be a royal pain.  I know, Bill; I have heard your 
proclamations as to how undocumented asll of Windows is, etc, compared
to the Mac in '85, and I am glad to hear that the Mac is more programmer-
friendly than Windows is.  Pooling opinions of others I have talked to, 
however, I tend to doubt that.

   I really have to agree with Bill here. Thomas is only showing here
   that he is a CLI fanatic. Arguments like, "I feel sorry for you" are
   about as weak as it gets.

Are YOU satisfied now?

   To pick a good example of how good (excellent, I daresay) a
   programming environment can be on a GUI based system, consider Think
   Pascal. To trace a variable, drag it to the trace window. To see the
   status of the registers, click the register button. To put a
   breakpoint in, click next to the line you want it at. To put a file
   into the project you are working on (the equivalent of the makefile on
   a Unix system) just add it to the project window (via the standard
   file open dialog). To remove it, just hit the delete button after
   hilighting it. To do a make, just pull down to the make option. Etc.
   While using a CLI may be all well and good for some things, it is by
   no means the "only" or "best" way to do programming. I'd argue, in
   light of the above, that it is simply the "old" way, and a good GUI
   designed development system can be just as good and much easier to
   boot.

All very persuasive arguments against using the command-line version
of your favorite compiler, and all taken very much to heart, really.

I, however, do not use the command-line compiler.  I find it to be
too complex and inaccessible for my uses, and therefore it is never
used.  I use the Borland Editor.  If I want to compile I either hit
F9 or pull down the compile menu.  To compile and run, Ctrl-F9,
or pull down the 'Run...' menu.  All modifications to the compiler are 
accesible within the editor.  The only thing which is slightly different
than your GUI example (in substance if not form) is the 'project'
system.  Each project is an ASCII text file, which simply lists each
file in the project.  To delete a file, put the cursor on the line and
press Ctrl-Y.  (Ctrl-Y is a command left over from the WordStar word
processor which yet plagues DOS apps).  Not all programs need a project, 
however.  If your program all fits into one file (or all the other files are 
called by '#include' statements), no project is necessary.  Therefore, I
don't have to mess with the project until the program is large enough to 
take up a bit of my time, so the hassle is really non-existant.  (The 
'hassle' being that I need to open the .prj file into the editor, which
means saving the other file and closing it.  Alt-F6 gets me back to the
program itself, however, with my cursor in the same place I had left it.)

Wonderful response, wrong situation.


   | David M. A. Putzolu               | putzolu@cs.ucdavis.edu              |
   | Senior Undergraduate              | op disclaimer(opinion : ptr mine)   |
   | Computer Science and Psychology   |      Money? Who needs money?        |
   | University of California at Davis |          I've got fish!             |


		---- tomster@wpi.wpi.edu

PS:  I am not a CLI fanatic.  I use a CLI, yes.  I also use Mac System 7.0
	on occasion.  Not all programs run better or are easier to use on a Mac
	than in DOS.  My main gripe, though, is on a hardware level.
--
/^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\
|  The bleeding hearts and the artists  \ /  Words of Wisdom, Inc.            |
|  make their stand.  And when they've  / \  Thomas R. Dibble, esquire, C.E.O.|
|  given you their all, some stagger &  \ /  aka, The Tomster, Tomahawk, etc. |
|  fall,  after  all,  it's not  easy,  / \  send mail/ money to:             |
|  banging your heart against some mad  \ /  tomster@wpi.wpi.edu              |
|  bugger's wall. ---R. Waters, _Wall_  / \  (or don't send it at all)        |
\vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv/
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy