Re: [dev] ncurses or ...

From: Dimitris Zervas <>
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2014 15:07:47 +0200

>> Oh, and to come in on an earlier point that was made, TUI sucks, the
>> only good thing about it is that TUI programs tend to have better
>> keybindings and scriptability.
> Well my thoughs on interface: CLI is very good because it is "unidimensional"
> streams/lines of texts. Which is mostly simple to understand and handle.
> Trouble is we sometimes need two dimensional representation of data (very
> likely that is overused). And for this task we have GUI and TUI, realistically
> GUI should be superior to TUI, but sometimes you just do not have graphical
> access, and then having TUI might be quite nice. And even though ncurses seem
> to be kinda sucky, I think most of GUI toolkits do not fare much better. There
> might be exceptions (like mentioned tk, which allows very simple and quick
> creation of guis, though not in C...) I think it would be hard to say that gtk
> or qt is significantly better then curses. I believe most suckiness of curses
> comes from the fact that it has to know how to interact with tons terminals and
> not from the part that its TUI interface library (though former flows from the
> latter).

So, what I'm telling is to write a simpler library that will support a
very limited number of terms.
That would make it light and suckless.
Received on Sun Feb 02 2014 - 14:07:47 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Feb 02 2014 - 14:12:07 CET