The
CLI programming environment can match the environment provided by GUIs feature for feature,
with the single exception of the graphical interface itself.
The inconvenience, if inconvenience it is, arises from the fact that the CLI programming environment
relies on separate tools. For example, assuming you are working in the X Window System,
you might be running one or more text editors, such as vi, pico, nano, joe, or emacs, each in its
own terminal window. You might use another terminal window for compiling your program, either
by invoking the compiler gcc (the GNU compiler collection) directly, or by using the make utility.
In still another window you might be running a debugger such as gdb (the GNU debugger). If you
are unfamiliar with the library you are using, you might have a Web browser open to view some
sort of online documentation, or you might be using a program such as xman that displays Linux
manual (man) pages in a graphical format.
It is not a given, however, that graphical IDEs are better than using discrete tools. Rather, it is a
matter of which model developers feel most comfortable using, which method makes developers
the most productive, and which approach best fits each developer??™s personal working style. Many
long-time UNIX and Linux developers feel more comfortable with and work more productively
using command-line tools: vi or emacs for writing and editing code, gcc and make for compilation,
and gdb and kgdb for debugging.
Pages:
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391