5 ms·
It depends on your setup. If you have a central home directory that is mounted on every server via nfs and zsh is installed everywhere or if you have setup som
by chme 8y ago
It depends on your setup.
If you have a central home directory that is mounted on every server via nfs and zsh is installed everywhere or if you have setup some (semi-)automated file syncing/deploying and develop just on one machine that is setup correctly, then why not?
The main reason for programming Shell/Bash for me is, because its available on the tiniest of Systems, like initramfs, or routers. There aren't many options for scripting. But I also don't know if Bash Infinity makes sense there. So while this project looks interesting, I don't see me using it anytime soon.
- tomc1985 8y agoIt's the same reason for favoring defaults. They are universal, and everywhere, and lets one get to work immediately. Constantly porting over customizations just so a spoiled butt can work comfortably gets tiresome. It's even easier than fussing about trying to automate the whole thing... Bash is intentionally scoped to be small. The language seems almost intentionally difficult to grok for large projects. There are very few legitimate use cases for large bash scripts, in my opinion, and frameworks only make that harder to see. Javascript also started scoped small, but it was everywhere, and look at it now...
- TeMPOraL 8y ago> There are very few legitimate use cases for large bash scripts, in my opinion, and frameworks only make that harder to see. Javascript also started scoped small, but it was everywhere, and look at it now... Maybe the meaning of "large" depends on familiarity, but somehow, a big part of UNIX/Linux is a pile of large bash scripts...