Tools like more or less make only sense in consoles.
...in the context that you think of more or less tools. i pipe things to leafpad EVERY DAY. i also use the console versions. different tools, different uses.
Every X window based editor or text viewer works like more/less by default.
a lot of them dont work well (or at all) when you try to pipe text to them. let me know which graphical editors i can pipe to. i use leafpad for that.
i tried piping ls to nano, and the cpu load jumped and nano locked me out of the term. so i opened another and killed nano.
so in terms of piping text to it, text editors do not work like more or less.
If you load long texts into any editor your will see the start of the text and will have to page down to the end, not the other way round as in a console.
less goes up and down. so does leafpad. so does nano. its not just about top vs bottom, its about scrolling in both directions.
And that's exactly why I fail to understand what this thread has to do with less
its true, in the comparison youve provided there doesnt seem to be a lot of similarity. but i find your comparison somewhat lacking.
less is a pager regardless of direction, it lets you move up AND down through text, which is what this tool does.
and unlike most editors, you can pipe stdout to its stdin.
see how its like less now?
why it is titled "script generators".
well, it *does* generate a script.
but since if you cant immediately guess the point of that you seem to insinuate that there must not be one, i will wait for you to suggest that theres no point in generating a script this way either. though i would only tell you that i had a reason for doing so.
Keep it simple: find /usr/share | yad --text-info
um, NO. i added standard options until it did what i wanted-- i wanted to be able to click on urls, so i used the option. i wanted to have it display monospace text, so i used the option.
and since it makes this TINY little window that barely shows any text and you have to resize every time, i saved myself the trouble of that by using --maxmized.
and i will continue to do it how it works for me.
what do you think the point of command line options is, anyway?
For a (speed) comparison here some examples.
i know its slow--
thats not always the first priority.
now pipe to less and select all text.
oh wait, you cant.
now pipe to less and edit the text in it
oh wait, if this is possible its VERY far from newbie friendly (at least you can search.)
i am not proposing this as a REPLACEMENT for less. nor an enhancement-- its an alternative, with slightly different features and uses. but it has more in common with less than any other command line tool.
calling it "graphical less" is exactly what i called it years ago, when someone said to me "what i should i make using pygtk?"
that tool was better than using yad for it-- so is leafpad a lot of the time. for long timeouts, yad is probably going to be better than leafpad for this.
i would understand your aversion to features if i was trying to bloat up puppy or replace less, but im not doing either-- just making a tool for my own use, and demonstrating it.
but the features are there because if i remove them, i dont like it as much. that seems like a pretty good reason to include them. and no, less will NOT do everything i use this for-- or vice versa. which is why i use both.
i can picture you reviewing less when it came out-- asking what the point of less is when more and cat already do the same thing, using less ram and half the code. thats fine. have fun.