From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 8fef4200 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 17:37:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id D68DF9CD81; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:37:00 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724059CD74; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:36:42 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="pMk8at0/"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 250449CD74; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:36:41 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qv1-f48.google.com (mail-qv1-f48.google.com [209.85.219.48]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 958749CD73 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:36:40 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qv1-f48.google.com with SMTP id p2so5360274qvo.10 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 09:36:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=F3xX3GB9pmF3nOu91coxQC/CPHzHneg6L7R0Xfcn+zE=; b=pMk8at0/oql1/6V9aCILiJfQVNglAdpSBmcIm95UE4p5cxeQiQfO2OdSaeJvCPmJxN z0yuLraCDj/z9PfkSEfk8goSVWnpmrKucSmOaAAatjxfpSlJWf4aXjKKOjnExfsvGQkD bnezetnmuhonCsAkgM1e7NpnZLeXu8YVMTIAnuAocQMnJ19ZI4euuVkZOb8NMMan4AU6 H51fAI29onR3vEYpPS+cIipuFUqB4qZT0mRRFLNtOcJw8JNg0+RacUEEQZxZdVsQM7H7 PYf0VkfLue624DMyhSxZre4xnpLdPDuJFBPn+LEdXbwpZTwBrVa/CzmP1z9TZLcocr3E zFLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=F3xX3GB9pmF3nOu91coxQC/CPHzHneg6L7R0Xfcn+zE=; b=eoaCjBZ0SNh31k4adJ4ydlqZVtFD6726BTWs+EytAZqHW1e2POrvWGLfxpIyFMTRA0 v3Zxq6p6ki+1ij9bYeFxSqnI81Lo14YjfIosdzQ50c6jawU1J6k2SdxHTk4FftCQ9Glx ex1u5LAakJYVUz+D/7JsYyhwfszrEnk1yaFB+/Gtn7ZYyHevUhUCjjEhp9TbzyKG+Jwa WQKKBDOghS4OFAsyItyT0+mJdwWlg/MRp5avcr23vTrBRaur/mlQAh6d70gMzxtUyRXY CoEXJnCWx5DGHTMs+4wRB2FNgrvshNhmxbmgF+18C3J+Z08eR4NS34FWUUgfXcReh/5h MTFg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWwkrocuvosUnk/8wlLs0Bvcfdy6xNVF4v2uGZYnm8/NhRcwHmB EVlt0+YdEJim19cxBr55GSFT7nIq6vxoaIT5km4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxGlqijPCqJR5URpDJ7Y5pEtZLhGZhErjhi4YMZ1U4P9GAIGNgqo79YEMFJ/tpi5HaVyQclQx2dhbTxHpl8Kd4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:923:: with SMTP id dk3mr3774857qvb.96.1581442599760; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 09:36:39 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <202002101546.01AFkOSc001266@freefriends.org> <202002110933.01B9XqQX004159@freefriends.org> In-Reply-To: From: Dan Cross Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 12:36:03 -0500 Message-ID: To: Rob Pike Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006438c6059e504c47" Subject: Re: [TUHS] V9 shell [was Re: Warner's Early Unix Presentation] X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --0000000000006438c6059e504c47 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 4:59 AM Rob Pike wrote: > My general mood about the current standard way of nerd working is how > unimaginative and old-fashioned it feels. There are countless ways we could > be interacting with our terminals, editors, and shells while we program, > but for various sociological and historical reasons we're pretty much using > one from decades ago. I'm sure it's productive for almost everyone, but it > seems dull to me. We could be doing something much more dynamic. I mean, > xterm is hardly more sophisticated than the lame terminal code that ran in > mpx (ca. 1982), other than colors and cursor addressing, which date from > the 1960s via early PCs. IDEs don't sing to me, although they are powerful, > because they don't integrate well with the environment, only with the > language. And they are just lots of features, not a coherent vision. No > model to speak of. > > Compare what happened with our shell windows with what happened with our > "smart" phones in the last 20 years and you'll get some inkling of what I > think we're missing. It's not that we should program the way we use > iPhones, but that there are fields where user interface work has made a > real different recently. Not so in programming, though. We're missing out. > What do you think of thinks like Jupyter or Lighttable? The early demos for the latter, I thought, were particularly compelling (though sadly the current implementation seems like much more of a traditional text editor and far removed from the original vision). Compare https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H58-n7uldoU to www.youtube.com/watch?v=52SVAMM3V78 But I'm a grumpy old man and getting far off topic. Warren should cry, > "enough!". > One of the reasons we study history is to understand the present and inform our decisions for the future. Personally, I enjoy these sorts of explorations of where we might have done things differently. - Dan C. --0000000000006438c6059e504c47 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 4:59 AM Rob Pike <robpike@gmail.com> wrote:
My general mood about the current standard way of nerd working is how un= imaginative and old-fashioned it feels. There are countless ways we could b= e interacting with our terminals, editors, and shells while we program, but= for various sociological and historical reasons we're pretty much usin= g one from decades ago. I'm sure it's productive for almost everyon= e, but it seems dull to me. We could be doing something much more dynamic. = I mean, xterm is hardly more sophisticated than the lame terminal code that= ran in mpx (ca. 1982), other than colors and cursor addressing, which date= from the 1960s via early PCs. IDEs don't sing to me, although they are= powerful, because they don't integrate well with the environment, only= with the language. And they are just lots of features, not a coherent visi= on. No model to speak of.

Compare what happened with our shell windows wi= th what happened with our "smart" phones in the last 20 years and= you'll get some inkling of what I think we're missing. It's no= t that we should program the way we use iPhones, but that there are fields = where user interface work has made a real different recently. Not so in pro= gramming, though. We're missing out.

<= div>
What do you think of thinks like Jupyter or Lighttable?=C2=A0 The = early demos for the latter, I thought, were particularly compelling (though= sadly the current implementation seems like much more of a traditional tex= t editor and far removed from the original vision). Compare https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= =3DH58-n7uldoU to=C2=A0www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D52SVAMM3V78

But I'm a grumpy old man and getting far off topic. Warren sh= ould cry, "enough!".

= One of the reasons we study history is to understand the present and inform= our decisions for the future. Personally, I enjoy these sorts of explorati= ons of where we might have done things differently.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 - Dan C.

--0000000000006438c6059e504c47--