From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11108 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2004 06:26:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 11089 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2004 06:26:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO monty-python.gnu.org) (199.232.76.173) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Mar 2004 06:26:12 -0000 Received: from [207.232.27.5] (helo=WST0054) by monty-python.gnu.org with asmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1B6OIs-00025e-3f; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:25:22 -0500 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 10:29:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: David Carlton CC: cagney@gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: (message from David Carlton on Wed, 24 Mar 2004 15:11:25 -0800) Subject: Re: TUI == ? Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <406214B6.6070007@gnu.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg00252.txt.bz2 > From: David Carlton > Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 15:11:25 -0800 > > I really don't have a strong opinion at all, but I would vote for > option 2 - the regular cli is also a text user interface, and the tui > outputs escape codes which don't seem to me like text but do seem to > me like a terminal-ish thing. The CLI interface also outputs terminal commands, so this aspect doesn't really differentiate between the two. To me, TUI sounds like GUI, but with G(raphics) replaced by T(ext). While the CLI is also ``a user interface'', it is more common to call it ``command-line interface'', which we already do.