3 ms·
Love the implementation. Can't help but think about another "startup" or project that uses Machine Learning to predict your bash commands... which in most if n
by sdan 7y ago
Love the implementation.
Can't help but think about another "startup" or project that uses Machine Learning to predict your bash commands... which in most if not all cases is probably not necessary XD.
- dmd 7y agoLike this? https://tabnine.com/blog/deep/ https://tabnine.com/blog/deep/
- sdan 7y agoYikes. Yes. Not sure if other developers agree with me on this: I probably don't need autocompletion, I'm not writing an essay; I'm writing code where every character is a lot more impactful than forgetting a semicolon here or there. For this reason, having autocompletion could probably be an annoyance than helpful.
- hnlmorg 7y agoPersonally I'm the exact opposite - weirdly for the same reasons you cited too. When programming I can usually predict what will come next or the compiler will usually slap me if I've done something dumb. Whereas it's easier to miss something in a shell because everything is a little more "golfed" and mistakes can go unnoticed for a while if you're being down-right careless. I'd love it if there was a way to do a "test run" of a command line where it prints what it would do without actually touching the file system (for example).
- sdan 7y agoPretty sure a simple "dry run" is what you're looking for. Not sure what programs support it, but I know Docker for one does.
- hnlmorg 7y agoSorry yes, "dry run". There are definitely ways of doing it on a command by command basis but what I was more thinking about was a dry run on an entire pipeline. It's not a use case I tend to run into much these days though because there are usually better tools.