command line vs gui
in [General Linux]
|
Prev: micro solution backpack cd-writer hell
Next: "...error while loading shared libraries: libg2c.so.0"
From: Tobias Brox on 26 Nov 2005 17:55 [Peter T. Breuer] > Because it's NOT infinite. Boolean forms have a "normal form" to which > all may be reduced: the conjunction of disjuncts of atomic propositions > and their negations. Over the time, I've been building several web-based database query tools - all of them ment for "ordinary users", thus never really making it possible for the user to specify arbritrary SQL sentences. (Actually, in the first project I made, the engine was built so that any arbritrary query could be built from the user input - but in reality the user was constrained by the way the form was built up. Normally, one would never allow web clients to be physically able to specify arbritrary SQL, but I left both authentication, access control and audit logging to the database) Though, never thinking really hard about it, I have come to the conclution that you are completely right; any boolean expression can be rewritten to a well-formed, simple expression - thus it's theoretically possible to build a simple user interface actually constructing arbritrary queries by SQL. I think a good GUI would actually generate the SQL, and let the user see the query and eventually hand-edit it. Of course, my query tools are not intended for experts, thus I have specific query pages with specific radio buttons / input boxes / check-boxes, and strong hinting that the users should contact me if they have more advanced queries. I get such queries fairly seldom. -- This signature has been virus scanned, and is probably safe to read Tobias Brox, 69?42'N, 18?57'E
From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz on 27 Nov 2005 09:20 In <3un2i1F12cdr5U1(a)individual.net>, on 11/25/2005 at 12:01 AM, blmblm(a)myrealbox.com said: >Nice to hear another opinion on this. You're right that duplicating >information is not helpful except in conforming to a supposed >syntactic standard It's a real standard. Or at least a real RFC. >which only AC seems to be adamant about No. Many people are adamant about the standard, although indifferent to what AC wants. According to the standard the name and the comment are both *optional*. >And in the process of removing the duplicate information in headers, It would be more helpful for to use From: "B. L. Massingill" <blmblm(a)myrealbox.com> but, as I noted, what you are currently using is syntactically valid. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org
From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz on 27 Nov 2005 09:13 In <29mdnb291eCrcBjenZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d(a)is.co.za>, on 11/24/2005 at 10:41 AM, news(a)absamail.co.za said: >Robert Heller wrote: >> Right. For some commands (such as find), there is no real chance of >> ANY viable 'graphical' interface. >Perhaps that's because 'find' is an unstructured mess ? Certainly, but that doesn't mean that you couldn't do a useful front end for it. >> The only sort of 'best of both worlds' is a GUI desktop that >> includes an 'shell window' (xterm+shell). That's only part of what is needed. >> The only sort of 'unifying' interface is going to be an *intelligent* >> voice-recognition / natural-language type of interface, ala Star Trek. Star Trek doesn't address the sorts of ambiguities in natural language that cause problems in the real world. Voice recognition can be a useful tool, but I don't see any prospect of its being a viable replacement for other sorts of UI. >You can't do eg. mathematics and 'lasting' music by sitting around >the camp-fire talking. But you can do Mathematics by standing around the blackboard talking, chalk in hand. Contemporary Mathematics makes considerable use of visual metaphors, e.g., commutative diagrams of functions. >> One way of thinking about the differences between a GUI (aka >> 'point-and-click') and a CLI and how they relate to how effectively >> one can communicate with one's computer to get stuff done is to >> consider that a GUI interface is not really much different than a >> pre-lingual communication system. E.g., the steering wheel of a car. I wouldn't care to use a CLI as a replacement. >If you prefer to keep the details in your mind, instead of following >a prompt path, do you also refuse to use a telephone directory ? When it's all that he has, or when a better alternative is available to him? Why shouldn't he refuse to use a dead tree if he hast the data online and can do searches? A telephone directory is fine when you know the correct spelling of the entire name, but otherwise it is severely limited. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org
From: blmblm on 27 Nov 2005 12:59 In article <4389c0a0$5$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice(a)news.patriot.net>, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote: >In <3un2i1F12cdr5U1(a)individual.net>, on 11/25/2005 > at 12:01 AM, blmblm(a)myrealbox.com said: > >>Nice to hear another opinion on this. You're right that duplicating >>information is not helpful except in conforming to a supposed >>syntactic standard > >It's a real standard. Or at least a real RFC. > >>which only AC seems to be adamant about > >No. Many people are adamant about the standard, although indifferent >to what AC wants. According to the standard the name and the comment >are both *optional*. > > >>And in the process of removing the duplicate information in headers, > >It would be more helpful for to use > >From: "B. L. Massingill" <blmblm(a)myrealbox.com> > >but, as I noted, what you are currently using is syntactically valid. > Fair enough, and thanks for clarifying. AC referred to "standard practice on Usenet", and I thought it was strange that no one had called me on it before. Going by your description, however, what I'm doing now is in conformance with the relevant RFC, though perhaps in violation of custom. I notice, however, that one of the regulars in another newsgroup I follow uses the same form (address only, "name" in signature). For some reason I find myself reluctant to put a name in a more visible place than my signature. Maybe at some point I'll get over it. <shrug> -- | B. L. Massingill | ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz on 27 Nov 2005 19:25
In <3uuag4F12r590U1(a)individual.net>, on 11/27/2005 at 05:59 PM, blmblm(a)myrealbox.com said: >Fair enough, and thanks for clarifying. AC referred to "standard >practice on Usenet", and I thought it was strange that no one had >called me on it before. While it's customary to include a name, RFC 1855 ("Netiquette Guidelines") doesn't mention it. Most other old timers understand why chastising you for it is not only incorrect but itself a breach of netiquette. >Going by your description, however, what I'm doing now is in >conformance with the relevant RFC, though perhaps in violation of >custom. Absolutely. >I notice, however, that one of the regulars in another newsgroup I >follow uses the same form (address only, "name" in signature). Lots do. It's a nuisance, but in no way is it rude. >For some reason I find myself reluctant to put a name in a more >visible place than my signature. Maybe at some point I'll get Well; that's between you and AC; the rest of the world considers it your prerogative to withhold your name if you so choose. >Maybe at some point I'll get over it. That would be nice, but you are under no obligation to do so. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org |