undefined | Better HN

0 pointsboomlinde23d ago0 comments

> X11 or any network transparent graphics protocol doesn't solve the problems that a terminal solves. how do you pipe data through multiple applications in one command using a GUI for example? nobody has been able to solve that in a practical way yet.

It seems to me that you are conflating the role of the terminal with the role of the shell. The terminal accepts streams of text and commands to instruct the terminal, so that software can accept input and present output. It doesn't fundamentally need to be aware of the concepts of pipes and commands to do that.

Of course, that doesn't stop iTerm2 from doing RCE by design, but at a conceptual level this is not a problem inherent to a terminal.

0 comments

em-bee22d ago

i am not conflating them, the problem is rather that the current terminals define or restrict what the shell can do. shells are being rewritten already. b they could not do what i want them to do without the terminals changing too, so the terminal needs to be next.

boomlindeOP21d ago

You can absolutely pipe programs together using a shell without a terminal. This also doesn't restric in any way the possibility to "output to some kind of graphical device/interface that uses that semantic information to display the data using nice graphical interface elements".

What is it specifically that you want to do which your favorite shell doesn't allow because it is restricted by terminals?

em-bee21d ago

yes, i can write a program that takes data and displays it nicely. but in order to use graphics i need a second channel to send the graphic instructions, for x11, wayland or even MacOS or wndows. at that point i have two interfaces, the terminal and that graphics display. i want both to be in one. i want the terminal to be that graphical output. that currently is only possible through in-band escape sequences. that is the restriction i want to get rid of.

boomlindeOP21d ago

I don't fully understand the request. On one hand you don't want a second channel to send the graphics instructions, but on the other you don't want to use in-band escape sequences.

Maybe you'd be interested to learn about plan9's graphical terminal. Its window manager runs entirely within it, and all windows just represent multiplexed access to limited areas of the terminal.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

em-bee22d ago

boomlindeOP21d ago

What is it specifically that you want to do which your favorite shell doesn't allow because it is restricted by terminals?

em-bee21d ago

boomlindeOP21d ago

I don't fully understand the request. On one hand you don't want a second channel to send the graphics instructions, but on the other you don't want to use in-band escape sequences.

Maybe you'd be interested to learn about plan9's graphical terminal. Its window manager runs entirely within it, and all windows just represent multiplexed access to limited areas of the terminal.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse