Am 16.04.2012 um 20:51 schrieb Kurt H Maier :
>> I think you are wrong. An example for a TUI with images is w3m compiled with
>> inline images.
>
> Once you include graphics, it is a graphical interface. What the hell
> happened to this list that this has to be explained?
I think you missed m
Smith: *Computers* are artificial. Get over it. TUI specifically
refers to somethign stupid enough to do character-addressing inside a
typewriter emulator. GUI works at the pixel level. Sophistry about the
difference between the two is unproductive and annoying.
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 04:51
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 11:02:40PM +0200, Joerg Zinke wrote:
> I think you are wrong. An example for a TUI with images is w3m compiled with
> inline images.
Once you include graphics, it is a graphical interface. What the hell
happened to this list that this has to be explained?
On 14/04/2012, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> the distinction between TUIs and GUIs is completely artificial.
This. Furthermore, the distinction between text and graphic is totally
artificial, and the distinction between natural and artificial is
itself totally artificial (^_~)
The former distinctio
Greetings.
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 23:33:00 +0200 Joerg Zinke wrote:
>
> Am 14.04.2012 um 17:38 schrieb Connor Lane Smith :
>
> > But that aside, the distinction between TUIs and GUIs is completely
> > artificial. The only difference is that a "TUI" *cannot* display
> > images, even when it might b
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Joerg Zinke wrote:
> I think you are wrong. An example for a TUI with images is w3m compiled with
> inline images.
I think, by definition, a TUI cannot display images. It becomes a GUI.
--Andrew Hills
Am 14.04.2012 um 17:38 schrieb Connor Lane Smith :
> But that aside, the distinction between TUIs and GUIs is completely
> artificial. The only difference is that a "TUI" *cannot* display
> images, even when it might be useful.
I think you are wrong. An example for a TUI with images is w3m compi
On 14 April 2012 16:12, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
> The curses version is a TUI; it uses characters rather than arbitrary
> icons or drawing graphics.
So do other vim GUIs. It's a text editor. Looking at my vim I just see
a lot of text. Text which I edit.
But that aside, the distinction between
On 4/13/12, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> vim *is* a GUI. It's not a line editor, is it? libcurses is a GUI
> toolkit too, it just happens to abstract over the hack that is ANSI
> escapes.
>
The curses version is a TUI; it uses characters rather than arbitrary
icons or drawing graphics.
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 03:12:26PM +0100, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>
> vim *is* a GUI. It's not a line editor, is it? libcurses is a GUI
> toolkit too, it just happens to abstract over the hack that is ANSI
> escapes.
libcurses is a hack that abstracts over every single
character-addressing hack
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Stephen Paul Weber
wrote:
> Somebody claiming to be Andrew Hills wrote:
>> You couldn't pay me to use the GTK+ GUI. I use the pure X11 GUI. So
>> does everyone else here at work.
>
>
> People use vim from a GUI?
> /me confused
Vim works better when it's not stuck
On 13 April 2012 15:07, Stephen Paul Weber wrote:
> People use vim from a GUI?
vim *is* a GUI. It's not a line editor, is it? libcurses is a GUI
toolkit too, it just happens to abstract over the hack that is ANSI
escapes.
cls
Somebody claiming to be Andrew Hills wrote:
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Eckehard Berns wrote:
Vim draws placeholder chars for anything it can't display. But nobody
uses the pure X11 GUI of Vim anyway. You either use Vim in a terminal
or the GTK+ GUI (which - as far as I can tell - uses Pan
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Eckehard Berns wrote:
> Vim draws placeholder chars for anything it can't display. But nobody
> uses the pure X11 GUI of Vim anyway. You either use Vim in a terminal
> or the GTK+ GUI (which - as far as I can tell - uses Pango to draw
> text).
You couldn't pay me
Somebody signing messages as Petr Šabata wrote:
I'm quite happy with -misc-fixed-*.
Huh, for somereason I thought it didn't get that big, but I see that it will
go to almost the size I run my terminal at. I tried this with xterm:
-misc-fixed-medium-r-*-*-*-200-*-*-*-*-*-*
and it worked and
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 12:10:47PM -0500, Stephen Paul Weber wrote:
> Somebody claiming to be Nick wrote:
> >Quoth Stephen Paul Weber:
> >>My st install prints some utf8 chars fine (like ©) but others (like …) itt
> >>has trouble with.
> >
> >I *think* that would be because rxvt-unicode falls back
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 05:09:09PM -0500, Stephen Paul Weber wrote:
> Somebody claiming to be Eckehard Berns wrote:
> >I tried to find information regarding a bug in XmbDrawImageString using
> >Google and found a comment in Vim's gui_x11.c that suggests that that
> >function isn't quite sound. Vim
Somebody claiming to be Eckehard Berns wrote:
I tried to find information regarding a bug in XmbDrawImageString using
Google and found a comment in Vim's gui_x11.c that suggests that that
function isn't quite sound. Vim actually converts the string to wide
chars and uses XDrawImageString16 instea
> Huh, weird. What st does print (!D, and it sort of messes up
> formatting of characters right after it) makes very little sense to
> me, but that could be it. I'm not super-attached to Terminus, I
> just don't know any other X fixed fonts with big font sizes
> available.
I did a quick test and
Somebody claiming to be Nick wrote:
Quoth Stephen Paul Weber:
My st install prints some utf8 chars fine (like ©) but others (like …) itt
has trouble with.
I *think* that would be because rxvt-unicode falls back to another
font if the one you specify doesn't have a glyph it wants. So the
charac
Quoth Stephen Paul Weber:
> My st install prints some utf8 chars fine (like ©) but others (like …) itt
> has trouble with.
I *think* that would be because rxvt-unicode falls back to another
font if the one you specify doesn't have a glyph it wants. So the
characters st isn't printing aren't act
My st install prints some utf8 chars fine (like ©) but others (like …) itt
has trouble with. My font spec is:
"-*-terminus-medium-r-normal-*-20-*-*-*-*-*-*-*"
terminus displays all characters just fine under rxvt-unicode.
Is this a limitation of st, or am I doing something wrong? I looked th
22 matches
Mail list logo
