I love the part of talk about "modern" C developpement. Glad to see zig use as the build system and toolchain :) Thanks Abner. Looking forward to Handmade Boston.
All the features you describe, to be honest, should be integrated into your shell, call it /usr/bin/click if you want, I do not see why one would need to create a terminal for that though. However, a few things might need help by the terminal, of course. That could be done by introducing some VT sequence extensions. That would be a great colab between the different TEs we are having and the future shells to arise! Great PoC work! I like the ideas behind ;) Butr now, lol, while reading through your FAQ, it's not open-source anyways. I guess I've to accept that ;)
This looks great. If you take feature requests, I'd love it if I could use some $^ variable or something like that to reference the previous output instead of having to reach for the mouse. I think it breaks your flow in a similar way switching to the calculator does.
I feel compelled to remind everyone that terminals existed long before the gui, and as such were required to satisfy all our computing needs. All the features that the talker is implying can't be done with what we have most *certainly* can. I think the bigger advantage of Terminal click is that it is a more polished or available approach to those problems he talked about. not everyone is willing to sift through the bash manual or run a terminal multiplexer or learn a bajillion terminal utils that do practically nothing (as is commonly and classically the case I guess). HOWEVER! if you are like me and don't have the space or ability to download every program on earth or something, or just don't want to have so many extra things on your computer, or can't or don't want to use the mouse, etc-- here's how you can do all these things using what is already on your computer, in macos (that's my only personal experience really, sorry lol) 9:48 -- basic `tee` pipe. but who doesn't just directly write their build output to a file or at least pipe it to less? maybe that's just me tho XD. no confidence in my builds. 11:43 -- either a `bc` command or using just normal arithmetic expansion, which is built directly into bash, and probably most other shells. 13:10 -- tab completion. I do this all the time, super handy. oh and autocd, where instead of writing `cd XX`, you can just type in the dir name and it automagically recognizes that it's a directory to cd into and not an executable to run. I don't use autocd personally, but again, its there. 17:18 -- ohhhh that's nice. *really* nice. I will say tho again I'd just do a reverse search in copy mode with GNU Screen. then again i keep an aggressively large amount of output history XD and again it's much more convenient to use `tee` or the talker's app.
I have not seen anything in this terminal click demo that can't be done as a shell instead of a terminal emulator. Or even a shell wrapper. By all means, take on the task of a better terminal emulator, but I can't run it on my home machine from some alien computer that I'm not allowed to install things on. I can do that with a shell (or shell wrapper).
It's not for everyone. He sat and used the terminal for hours daily doing his programming work, he grew frustrated from the legacy features he doesn't use and want a fast and modern terminal with a selection of features he use daily. So that program came out as result of that. As he said he can't satisfied everyone and some legacy things will not works. If your job doesn't need to connect to alien computer over ssh and you work exclusively locally then terminal click us superior. Otherwise use the old terminal.
@@blarghblargh It's my personal experiences as a customer. I'm no more willing to pay (if I can) to closed source products. Not because of money, but because they die (sublime, onivim2, many more). And all my time I invested is wasted. Also for indie programmer it allows to accept PRs and new features. Hardly someone will invest time for this for paid closed source product.
@@code861 Of course, but chances that it will be pickuped up by someone is higher. While closed source can be bought by Amazon (fig terminal) and it's all over.
I love the part of talk about "modern" C developpement.
Glad to see zig use as the build system and toolchain :)
Thanks Abner. Looking forward to Handmade Boston.
Great talk. Learned a lot. Great guy!!
lets give some respect to this guy cus he tried and did a good job on this one
All the features you describe, to be honest, should be integrated into your shell, call it /usr/bin/click if you want, I do not see why one would need to create a terminal for that though. However, a few things might need help by the terminal, of course. That could be done by introducing some VT sequence extensions. That would be a great colab between the different TEs we are having and the future shells to arise! Great PoC work! I like the ideas behind ;)
Butr now, lol, while reading through your FAQ, it's not open-source anyways. I guess I've to accept that ;)
This looks great. If you take feature requests, I'd love it if I could use some $^ variable or something like that to reference the previous output instead of having to reach for the mouse.
I think it breaks your flow in a similar way switching to the calculator does.
I very like the way wezterm it does, it allows to do this and many more without reaching mouse.
I feel compelled to remind everyone that terminals existed long before the gui, and as such were required to satisfy all our computing needs. All the features that the talker is implying can't be done with what we have most *certainly* can. I think the bigger advantage of Terminal click is that it is a more polished or available approach to those problems he talked about. not everyone is willing to sift through the bash manual or run a terminal multiplexer or learn a bajillion terminal utils that do practically nothing (as is commonly and classically the case I guess).
HOWEVER! if you are like me and don't have the space or ability to download every program on earth or something, or just don't want to have so many extra things on your computer, or can't or don't want to use the mouse, etc-- here's how you can do all these things using what is already on your computer, in macos (that's my only personal experience really, sorry lol)
9:48 -- basic `tee` pipe. but who doesn't just directly write their build output to a file or at least pipe it to less? maybe that's just me tho XD. no confidence in my builds.
11:43 -- either a `bc` command or using just normal arithmetic expansion, which is built directly into bash, and probably most other shells.
13:10 -- tab completion. I do this all the time, super handy. oh and autocd, where instead of writing `cd XX`, you can just type in the dir name and it automagically recognizes that it's a directory to cd into and not an executable to run. I don't use autocd personally, but again, its there.
17:18 -- ohhhh that's nice. *really* nice. I will say tho again I'd just do a reverse search in copy mode with GNU Screen. then again i keep an aggressively large amount of output history XD and again it's much more convenient to use `tee` or the talker's app.
damn this guy living in parallel universe, ahead of his time. cool stuff cool stuff
I have not seen anything in this terminal click demo that can't be done as a shell instead of a terminal emulator. Or even a shell wrapper.
By all means, take on the task of a better terminal emulator, but I can't run it on my home machine from some alien computer that I'm not allowed to install things on. I can do that with a shell (or shell wrapper).
It's not for everyone. He sat and used the terminal for hours daily doing his programming work, he grew frustrated from the legacy features he doesn't use and want a fast and modern terminal with a selection of features he use daily. So that program came out as result of that. As he said he can't satisfied everyone and some legacy things will not works.
If your job doesn't need to connect to alien computer over ssh and you work exclusively locally then terminal click us superior. Otherwise use the old terminal.
I would suggest to open source core and provide paid extensions and integrate Lua (as wezterm) for configuration.
interesting idea. do you have specific precedent for this recommendation, or is it just a random idea?
@@blarghblargh It's my personal experiences as a customer. I'm no more willing to pay (if I can) to closed source products. Not because of money, but because they die (sublime, onivim2, many more). And all my time I invested is wasted. Also for indie programmer it allows to accept PRs and new features. Hardly someone will invest time for this for paid closed source product.
@@mephistotel87 doesn't open source die too? e.g. atom
@@code861 Of course, but chances that it will be pickuped up by someone is higher. While closed source can be bought by Amazon (fig terminal) and it's all over.
@@code861atom didnt die, it was killed
So you want to combine the features of an emulator and a shell. Hmmmm. Young people.
Good luck with that, Shells are complex.