Had another 48hr game jam this weekend...

[Iain Buclaw]

On 4 September 2013 22:08, Craig Dillabaugh <cdillaba at cg.scs.carleton.ca> wrote:
> On Wednesday, 4 September 2013 at 20:37:40 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 2, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Walter Bright <newshound2 at digitalmars.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/2/2013 1:36 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It's things like this "keyhole interface", that caused me to be
>>>> convinced that the GUI emperor has no clothes, and to turn to CLI-only
>>>> development.
>>>
>>>
>>> One of the giant failures of the GUI interface, and that VS suffers from,
>>> too, is when you need to do repetitive operations.
>>>
>>> On the CLI, I constantly use the history list, and I constantly write
>>> throwaway scripts to automate what I'm doing at the moment. It makes
>>> everything I do, no matter how obscure, only 2 or 3 keypresses.
>>>
>>> With VS, or any GUI, if there's not a button to do it, I'm reduced to:
>>>
>>> move mouse
>>> click
>>> move mouse
>>> click
>>
>>
>> Most editors these days have an option to record and playback macros.
>> Does VS really not have this?
>>
>>
>>> Sounds easy, right? It is easy. Now do it to 1000 photos. With a command
>>> line tool:
>>>
>>> write a script that does it to one picture, name it cc.bat
>>
>>
>> The problem I've encountered on Windows is that its default batch language
>> is terrible.  Any reasonable amount of command-line scripting requires
>> either a different shell or ports of all the Unix tools.
>
>
> Newer versions of Windows have Powershell, which as a Linux/CLI
> guy, I must admit is reasonably close to something like BASH
> (perhaps even superior for some tasks), and there are aliases to
> many of the Unix commands.   I think it may be the default batch
> language in the latest Windows versions.
>
> However, while it has aliases to many Unix-like commands it
> doesn't have everything an it also suffers from the Java diseases
> of having:
>
> Really.Long.Names.For.Everything

I thought Powershell got deprecated...

-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';