4 ms·
I think that anyone who is trying to imagine "the next shell" owes it to themselves to try PowerShell. It's .NET based and very, very different from the sh lin
by munchbunny 8y ago
I think that anyone who is trying to imagine "the next shell" owes it to themselves to try PowerShell.
It's .NET based and very, very different from the sh lineage, but I absolutely love its ability to use objects instead of strings as the underlying transmission medium between "processes". E.g. ls gives you file descriptors, ps gives you process descriptors, etc.
- JepZ 8y agoI was just about to ask if it is available for Linux, but then I saw that the official page advertises its cross-platform properties [1] :D I know about the different concept of Powershell for quite a while now, but since it is MS tech I didn't expect it to be available for Linux. Maybe I will try someday how it feels, but I am sceptical as the thing I like most about POSIX shells is that everything is just text and I wonder how Powershell will integrate with other *nix tools. [1]: https://github.com/powershell/powershell https://github.com/powershell/powershell
- munchbunny 8y agoThe boundary layer between text and object is definitely a weak spot in the abstraction for PowerShell. That's the main reason why I don't consider PowerShell strictly superior. That said, the way the language is designed makes calling into compiled .NET code seamless, which in turn makes doing really sophisticated shell scripting a breeze. When I saw what xonsh was trying to do, I recognized a lot of "PowerShell solves this problem a bit more gracefully".
- xrd 8y agoI've heard of it but never heard a compelling reason to try it. Until your statement: I'm now very interested.