Doesn’t that very much depend on the language and the IDE? In visual studio i don’t need to touch the command line for a debugger, it’l do all of that for me behind the scenes, which is the point of an IDE.
Hm, yeah, if you have an IDE made for your language, I suppose you can get around it for most things. (But that is not Windows-specific, most of those exist for Linux as well, after all).
Still, I have (for example) not worked in any project yet that did not have some bash scripts to automate project-specific tasks. Ireonically, the only person using a full-blown IDE in my team is also an absolute crack at the CLI.
I know those are anecdotal, but I would still maintain that it is very difficult to completely get around the CLI, and frankly, I do not see the benefit of doing so. An IDE is esssentially a nice wrapper around tons of CLI tools, and being able to use and understand them can only be beneficial.
Then do some C# development in Visual studio, and you’ll see how to develop while never touching the commandline ;) (but of course you could do some things via command line if you really want to) Everything from creating project to running & debugging to building & deploying, all via the IDE
Thanks, but for the little C# I need to write I’ll stick with nvim :D (Yeah yeah I know)
Incidentally, when I started to learn programming, I definitely was using an IDE (I can honestly not remember which one - I was following some book which included the setup of the IDE and instructions for that IDE only).
But even back then it always bugged me that I did not know what was going on in the background. When a button did not do what the book said it would do, that would turn into frustration because I could not understand what had happened, or why something failed. Sure, part of that was just inexperience, but even today, I easily despair at GUIs.
I could for example never get started with Godot because my brain just does not connect all the checkboxes and sliders with what is happening in the background. Bevy, on the other hand, was super easy to pick up precisely because there is no GUI.
Maybe I am just weird.
(Also I do not want to discourage anyone from using GUI tools, I originally just commented to support the “Linux is dev friendly” statement)
It seems you have not typed in “gui” when using lldb via cli. Also, people use cli debuggers because they want to. Everything has a gui, jetbrains happens to make some of the best ones, based on top of cli debuggers like lldb.
Debuggers run in command line, making them less accessable to the average person, so they need to learn the commands to get it running.
Same is true for Windows.
Frankly you cannot get around the command line when developing.
Doesn’t that very much depend on the language and the IDE? In visual studio i don’t need to touch the command line for a debugger, it’l do all of that for me behind the scenes, which is the point of an IDE.
Hm, yeah, if you have an IDE made for your language, I suppose you can get around it for most things. (But that is not Windows-specific, most of those exist for Linux as well, after all).
Still, I have (for example) not worked in any project yet that did not have some bash scripts to automate project-specific tasks. Ireonically, the only person using a full-blown IDE in my team is also an absolute crack at the CLI.
I know those are anecdotal, but I would still maintain that it is very difficult to completely get around the CLI, and frankly, I do not see the benefit of doing so. An IDE is esssentially a nice wrapper around tons of CLI tools, and being able to use and understand them can only be beneficial.
Then do some C# development in Visual studio, and you’ll see how to develop while never touching the commandline ;) (but of course you could do some things via command line if you really want to) Everything from creating project to running & debugging to building & deploying, all via the IDE
Thanks, but for the little C# I need to write I’ll stick with nvim :D (Yeah yeah I know)
Incidentally, when I started to learn programming, I definitely was using an IDE (I can honestly not remember which one - I was following some book which included the setup of the IDE and instructions for that IDE only).
But even back then it always bugged me that I did not know what was going on in the background. When a button did not do what the book said it would do, that would turn into frustration because I could not understand what had happened, or why something failed. Sure, part of that was just inexperience, but even today, I easily despair at GUIs.
I could for example never get started with Godot because my brain just does not connect all the checkboxes and sliders with what is happening in the background. Bevy, on the other hand, was super easy to pick up precisely because there is no GUI.
Maybe I am just weird.
(Also I do not want to discourage anyone from using GUI tools, I originally just commented to support the “Linux is dev friendly” statement)
deleted by creator
Most Windows debuggers have a GUI, including Microsoft’s own offerings, and even 3rd party ones (I use RemedyBG) have one.
Fair, but for those there presumably is a CLI as well? And conversely, what is stopping you from using a GUI debugger onLinux?
I was more thinking along the lines: you’d be hardpressed to find a debugger that does not have a CLI
It seems you have not typed in “gui” when using lldb via cli. Also, people use cli debuggers because they want to. Everything has a gui, jetbrains happens to make some of the best ones, based on top of cli debuggers like lldb.
If you have an IDE (or even VSCode) you can have graphical debugger just fine