begin  quoting Lan Barnes as of Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:19:07AM -0700:
> 
> On Fri, March 28, 2008 9:56 am, David Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 09:49:42AM -0700, Lan Barnes wrote:
> >
> >>But to remind everyone, cdparanoia was the original subject in this
> >>thread, and cdparanoia is CLI ... a CLI program that defaults to putting
> >>out smiley faces to stderr on success.
> >
> > As do an increasing number of CLI programs.  The studies and human factors
> > that cause people to need progress have nothing to do with CLI vs GUI,
> > it's because the users are human.
> 
> I have to admire you. I personally would not have the temerity to argue
> that my personal preferences are superior to the thought-through defaults
> of the founders of Unix.

I've told Ken Arnold that his pet project was wrongheaded, mostly on
the basis of my personal preferences.  And I consider him to be a huge
brain, worthy of respect.  So what? That just means I'll disrespect him
*politely*.

Appeals to authority, especially absent authority, just don't sit well.
If they're an authority, they can argue with me, and if there's a good
reason they're an authority, they'll probably convince me.

> > You're in the minority, even among CLI users, for wanting slience.
> 
> Absolutely. If I wanted to be in the majority, I'd use Windoze.

This is where appeals to the majority or to popularity break down. We've
already rejected that argument, yes?

> > But, cdparanoia does exactly what we're saying it should, it has a --quiet
> > option for scripting, but prints out progress in the default case.
> 
> Default behavior is exactly what we're talking about.

Y'know, I'm thinking about what I do, and my programs and scripts are
all over the place on this one.  It really depends on the envisioned
use.

But I don't think I've ever reserved stderr for just errors. If the
program dumps its output to stdout, then EVERYTHING else goes to stderr:
errors, warnings, status, progress updates... everything. As it should
be, really.

And do I worry about a program being "too chatty"? Not really.
Generally, it starts quiet, and as I get bothered, or feel the need
for a warm fuzzy, I start adding status messages, "you got here"
notices, progress-dots, etc.

Let the needs of the user drive the behavior.

Now, checking to see if a file descriptor is a terminal...that's just
evil and wrong.

-- 
I get unhappy when what works interactively doesn't work in a script.
Stewart Stremler


-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to