Rich Command Shells

Re:Rich Command Shells by vinodkd on Friday October 10, 2014 @10:46AM (#8437961)

well, not at that minute level, but every application worth its name has an undo log - and that's a pretty close functional equivalent, IMO.

And: applications that have Macro recorder features (Office and many text editors) allow you to actually record your actions - clicks or otherwise - into code that can be rerun.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Rich Command Shells by the-tomster on Friday October 10, 2014 @11:29AM (#8438195)

The problem there is that every application needs to implement a macro recorder, and every application needs to implement history and undo. With small programs that all handle text the shell takes care of history and automation, while the other programs can focus on solving a new problem.

Why have macros and history reimplemented badly by every application when one application could do it well?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Rich Command Shells by vinodkd on Friday October 10, 2014 @12:06PM (#8438464)

True, such a feature should really be system-wide - something like OSX's Automator, maybe.

That doesnt take away from the point, however, that GUI actions can be stored in history, composed, etc.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Rich Command Shells by a3n on Friday October 10, 2014 @12:32PM (#8438632)

But right now, they aren't. :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Rich Command Shells by akavel on Friday October 10, 2014 @03:33PM (#8439601)

Hah, but here we come back to my question: which was specifically not about what we do have "right now", but why those things that we do have right now are worse than the things "we" had before??

[ Parent | on HN ]