I've been coding for over 20 years now! (WOAH, do I feel old)
I've touched just about every resource imaginable under the Sun (too bad they were bought out by Oracle)
Why not a hybrid approach? There is this concept of "best tool for the job" rather than "use one tool, and only one tool EVER"
Reading through this, I see mixed opinions on both sides. I'm a developer who actively uses both sides throughout each and every day for different purposes.
For instance, I do all of my main development on Windows, so Sublime Text is my editor of choice. I have no qualms about dropping to console on servers to edit configs in nano though.
I use TortoiseGit to manage my repositories, but again, can still drop to console for more complex tools or server work. I find that a solid GUI in Tortoise suite of tools offers a significantly better diffing experience than anything I've seen on console to date, plus its easier to setup .gitignore lists or dealing with submodules. But when things break, recovery needs to happen on the console.
I've also come to love htop as a replacement for top as a "task manager" equiv on the console. With using it through PuTTy, it still supports mouse commands, so I can simply click on rows to select items, just like a normal GUI application. I think this is a prime example of what a hybrid application COULD do, if others followed this style.
I have a hybrid approach. I do all of my branch creation/switching, committing, pushing/pulling, single-file diff reviewing, etc. from the CLI. I hop over to my GUI when I'm trying to follow the branch history, doing conflict resolution after merging, or trying to view diffs.
If I'm trying to visually review something I use a GUI, if I'm just trying to do things with little visual feedback I use the CLI.
I'm on this hybrid approach, I use SmartGit every single day, but if I need for example to make a reset, I always do it on the CLI, cause I don't feel comfortable using the GUI for it, the terminology is not always precise, and the things really happening behind are difficult to see, so in some complex cases, I always go CLI, but for everyday commit/pull/push/branch/merge/3-way, GUI.
I think most people already do use some form of a hybrid approach anyway, which is where so much of the purism and shaming is misguided. The lines are blurry so taking a hardened position can be plain silly.
This is kinda how I feel. I'm pretty new as far having a setup I like, and I've only recently been dipping my toe into Linux. I've used GUI's for mostly everything up until recently and have been trying CLI stuff as I get comfortable with it. If I find that I like something better in CLI, then I make that my primary tool for that job, but for things that I still like better as a GUI, I'll keep using the GUI.
Like you said, it's using the best tool for the job. Tools are only as useful as the person using it, so if I'm terrible at a certain GUI program or a certain CLI program, then it's probably better to not use it unless I'm really wanting to invest my time and energy into it.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Why not a hybrid approach? There is this concept of "best tool for the job" rather than "use one tool, and only one tool EVER"
Reading through this, I see mixed opinions on both sides. I'm a developer who actively uses both sides throughout each and every day for different purposes.
For instance, I do all of my main development on Windows, so Sublime Text is my editor of choice. I have no qualms about dropping to console on servers to edit configs in nano though.
I use TortoiseGit to manage my repositories, but again, can still drop to console for more complex tools or server work. I find that a solid GUI in Tortoise suite of tools offers a significantly better diffing experience than anything I've seen on console to date, plus its easier to setup .gitignore lists or dealing with submodules. But when things break, recovery needs to happen on the console.
I've also come to love htop as a replacement for top as a "task manager" equiv on the console. With using it through PuTTy, it still supports mouse commands, so I can simply click on rows to select items, just like a normal GUI application. I think this is a prime example of what a hybrid application COULD do, if others followed this style.
I have a hybrid approach. I do all of my branch creation/switching, committing, pushing/pulling, single-file diff reviewing, etc. from the CLI. I hop over to my GUI when I'm trying to follow the branch history, doing conflict resolution after merging, or trying to view diffs.
If I'm trying to visually review something I use a GUI, if I'm just trying to do things with little visual feedback I use the CLI.
I'm on this hybrid approach, I use SmartGit every single day, but if I need for example to make a reset, I always do it on the CLI, cause I don't feel comfortable using the GUI for it, the terminology is not always precise, and the things really happening behind are difficult to see, so in some complex cases, I always go CLI, but for everyday commit/pull/push/branch/merge/3-way, GUI.
I think most people already do use some form of a hybrid approach anyway, which is where so much of the purism and shaming is misguided. The lines are blurry so taking a hardened position can be plain silly.
This is kinda how I feel. I'm pretty new as far having a setup I like, and I've only recently been dipping my toe into Linux. I've used GUI's for mostly everything up until recently and have been trying CLI stuff as I get comfortable with it. If I find that I like something better in CLI, then I make that my primary tool for that job, but for things that I still like better as a GUI, I'll keep using the GUI.
Like you said, it's using the best tool for the job. Tools are only as useful as the person using it, so if I'm terrible at a certain GUI program or a certain CLI program, then it's probably better to not use it unless I'm really wanting to invest my time and energy into it.