That is because list is still very much alive. If I create a new file in the folder, the list automatically updates and marks that an item is new. If I click on folders it navigates to them, and if I click on regular files some default open action will be triggered. I can change sorting order without re-execution. For the setup I have here, the default open action tells the outer window manager to swallow up until terminated, and hand over to a dedicated player or viewer and this composes over the network if run that way. The same naturally works if I hand input focus to the list job and navigate using the keyboard.
I’d disagree with this assessment. This is not magic, that’s just a reasonable interface at the current level of technology.
It’s only surprising because, in the area of terminals, we are more or less stuck in the dark ages and almost no one (with the notable exceptions of arcan and terminal.click) tries to catch up to modernity.
Ah, that makes sense! It’s just that for me this feels normal, and rather that the terminals I actually use cause, ahem, negative appreciation :-)
Case in point, some notebooks (though not jupyter out of the box) can provide a similar experience. Still, it is nice to see it more integrated with the terminal.
The interaction mode of some notebook applications is a close correspondent but the thing I love about Cat9 is that it fits its local Unix environment seamlessly. I mean, not naively, it’s not a weird TTY, but if you know Unix, you’re at home, and it works everywhere, not just within the confines of a single (often web) application. There’s a bunch of similar ideas all over Arcan – it’s a development of several Unix-y ideas that’s held back by neither Unix conservatism nor the “let’s make this like a VT-220”-style approach to portability.
Please add Next Generation Shell to the list. Treating output of programs as they were printed on paper is what most of the shells do. It’s rooted in teletype. I’m trying to catch up with vt52 which introduced cursor movement capability circa 1974/75. Bill Joy responded with vi in 1976 but shells largely ignored this capability.
Main ideas of UI in NGS: objects on the screen, recording of semantics of interactions (which allows replay), plugins that work with the objects.
OK. Watched terminal.click video. I see why you put the projects in different buckets. My perspective was just way more coarse grained: solve the dead text problem (while not ignoring decades of development outside of the shell/terminal space).
This is black fucking magic.
I’d disagree with this assessment. This is not magic, that’s just a reasonable interface at the current level of technology.
It’s only surprising because, in the area of terminals, we are more or less stuck in the dark ages and almost no one (with the notable exceptions of arcan and terminal.click) tries to catch up to modernity.
I’d disagree with this assessment of my post. It was meant to show appreciation, not genuine surprise :-).
Ah, that makes sense! It’s just that for me this feels normal, and rather that the terminals I actually use cause, ahem, negative appreciation :-)
Case in point, some notebooks (though not jupyter out of the box) can provide a similar experience. Still, it is nice to see it more integrated with the terminal.
The interaction mode of some notebook applications is a close correspondent but the thing I love about Cat9 is that it fits its local Unix environment seamlessly. I mean, not naively, it’s not a weird TTY, but if you know Unix, you’re at home, and it works everywhere, not just within the confines of a single (often web) application. There’s a bunch of similar ideas all over Arcan – it’s a development of several Unix-y ideas that’s held back by neither Unix conservatism nor the “let’s make this like a VT-220”-style approach to portability.
Please add Next Generation Shell to the list. Treating output of programs as they were printed on paper is what most of the shells do. It’s rooted in teletype. I’m trying to catch up with vt52 which introduced cursor movement capability circa 1974/75. Bill Joy responded with vi in 1976 but shells largely ignored this capability.
Main ideas of UI in NGS: objects on the screen, recording of semantics of interactions (which allows replay), plugins that work with the objects.
https://github.com/ngs-lang/ngs/wiki/UI-Design
https://github.com/ngs-lang/ngs/wiki/UI-Chain-Design
https://youtu.be/J4_DGkKGWIo
I am aware about NGS, and while it also does reinvent terminal/shell, I think it barks at a sufficiently different tree than, e.g. terminal.click.
Roughly nushell is to fish is the same as NGS to arcan’s terminal.
The first column solves data manipulation problem, how to do complex ops using a complex language, how to make complex tasks possible.
The second column solves the basic user interaction problem, how to make simple things easy.
OK. Watched terminal.click video. I see why you put the projects in different buckets. My perspective was just way more coarse grained: solve the dead text problem (while not ignoring decades of development outside of the shell/terminal space).
Edit: the video - https://youtu.be/hORONfUsbak