On Feb 16, 2:35am, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
} On 16.02.2019 02:14, m...@netbsd.org wrote:
} > There's a topic on peace-keeping in a large project.
} >
} > There are two types of feedback:
} >
} > - "this change makes the code simpler and twice as fast" (it's
} > objectively better)
} > - "I like colorful terminals" (my personal opinion)
}
} I object that this is just 'I like' case, I consider colors as an
} elementary feature. It's more visible in code or text editors as they
You can object all you want, but that doesn't change the fact
that it is personal preference.
} can show you whether the inserted program or config file is well formed
} or not. There were also programming languages using them (forthColor) as
} a part of syntax. In the ls(1) case it's much easier to spot that there
Yeah, so?
} is something wrong with a file (like a broken symlink).
Actually, it tells me absolutely nothing as I have no clue
what the different colours mean (not to mention that colours
disappear when output is logged). All I know is that some directories
look like an "explosion in a paint factory" or "angry fruit salad".
The colours convey absolutely no information to me. I need to use
other information to figure out what the colours are trying to tell
me. And, at that point, I might as well just be using the other
information.
} The world has moved on, it's today not just color vs no-color, but
} truecolor vs ansicolor. For example vt.c was patched in the Linux kernel
There's a really tempting expression that can be put here...
}-- End of excerpt from Kamil Rytarowski
