Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Clear Linux Switches From Xfce To GNOME, Benchmarks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by sirblackheart View Post
    There even exist people who think syntax highlighting is bloat.
    Like me. I normally have it turned off.

    How do you do syntax highlighting on a shell script, anyway?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ldo17 View Post

      What do you mean?

      ldo@theon:~> man -k discoverability
      discoverability: nothing appropriate.
      HA!!!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by ldo17 View Post

        Like me. I normally have it turned off.

        How do you do syntax highlighting on a shell script, anyway?
        Why bother with text when you can write binary code directly, right?

        Last edited by starshipeleven; 05-29-2017, 03:30 AM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
          That's just saying that CLI will never change (and I hope so as I don't like script breakage), does not contradict his first statements that you still need both GUI and CLI.
          Which GUI? The ones that are trendy at the moment, until they fall out of fashion and replaced by something else.

          Why do GUIs keep getting replaced? Answers on a postcard, please...

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ldo17 View Post
            Which CLI? The ones that are trendy at the moment, until they fall out of fashion and replaced by something else.
            Why do CLIs keep getting replaced? Answers on a postcard, please...
            fixed.
            Can I please remind you that there are more shells (which is a command line interface program) than GUIs?
            sh, dash, bash, ash, zsh, fish, tcsh, plus all proprietary shells used in commercial products like for example Cisco's or whatever else. Each brand has its own shell with its own commands, the basic ones are kinda similar (also because busibox) but apart from them it's all custom.

            And even the POSIX ones have differences so you can't use full features if you want your script to be portable.

            What does not change (usually) is the interface within the same shell while it gets updated.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
              Can I please remind you that there are more shells (which is a command line interface program) than GUIs?
              Counting POSIX-incompatible ones? No, you may not.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ldo17 View Post
                Counting POSIX-incompatible ones? No, you may not.
                Request rejected. It was a rhetorical question, you are not allowed to shift goalposts in your favor.

                You didn't specify POSIX anywhere so any shell is fair game.

                Anyway, there are like 8 posix-compliant shells (with extensions) if not more, so even if you shifted goalposts my post is still valid.

                Not to mention that actual CLI programs can have more/different arguments (like for example busybox vs gnu tools or some CLI tools in embedded distros or MacOS).

                WHERE IS YOUR ZOD NOW!!?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
                  Demand accepted. It was not a rhetorical question, after all.
                  T;FTFY.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by ldo17 View Post
                    T;FTFY.
                    Please learn how to fix stuff properly.

                    Also, as said above I'm still right even if we go by your shifted goalposts.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X