4 ms·

Y'all just have bias against the string system. Writing decent code in bash is just as possible as any other language. I stick to POSIX sh but same difference

Y'all just have bias against the string system. Writing decent code in bash is just as possible as any other language. I stick to POSIX sh but same difference.

unixhero 7y ago
Why POSIX sh? Bash is everywhere. I once in my career had access to and needed jobs performed on a mainframe with AIX running. It had bash, it had ruby, it had day, it had fish shell. I couldn't and can't understand why people insist on asceticism (Korn shell, POSIX sh) when nicer options are available.
- kohtatsu 7y ago
  Eh, I simply don't need bash. Every few dozen scripts or so I'll change the shebang to bash to have more than 1 array, but other than that I seldom pine anything that it has to offer. I believe it's a bloated mess along with most GNU utils, so avoiding it is partially out of spite, but I wouldn't impair my code to do so.
- m4r35n357 7y ago
  dash is 10% of the size of bash. You don't need the interactive features when running shell scripts, and the few "extra" features are pretty crap anyway (arrays? yeah right).
- unixhero 7y ago
  *zsh ... Not "day"
BiteCode_dev 7y ago
"Thirteen Incorrect Ways and Two Awkward Ways to Use Arrays" http://www.oilshell.org/blog/2016/11/06.html http://www.oilshell.org/blog/2016/11/06.html
- kohtatsu 7y ago
  Yeah I should clarify; I think it's well past the time of sh. Still, sh is unrivaled for portability and brevity/velocity; I wouldn't swap virtually any the shell scripts I've written for python scripts. I think sh is a decent and often well-suited tool if you can manage to wield it properly (not a straightforward endeavor). I look forward to checking out oilshell though, so thank you~ Edit: FWIW for arrays in POSIX sh I generally only use: set -- a b c echo $# echo "$1" shift echo "$@" Once in a blue moon "$*" or maybe an unquoted $@. See 2.5.2 of https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V3_chap02.html https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V... (My go-to reference)

Y'all just have bias against the string system. Writing decent code in bash is just as possible as any other language. I stick to POSIX sh but same difference.

unixhero 7y ago

Why POSIX sh? Bash is everywhere. I once in my career had access to and needed jobs performed on a mainframe with AIX running. It had bash, it had ruby, it had day, it had fish shell. I couldn't and can't understand why people insist on asceticism (Korn shell, POSIX sh) when nicer options are available.

kohtatsu 7y ago
Eh, I simply don't need bash. Every few dozen scripts or so I'll change the shebang to bash to have more than 1 array, but other than that I seldom pine anything that it has to offer. I believe it's a bloated mess along with most GNU utils, so avoiding it is partially out of spite, but I wouldn't impair my code to do so.
m4r35n357 7y ago
dash is 10% of the size of bash. You don't need the interactive features when running shell scripts, and the few "extra" features are pretty crap anyway (arrays? yeah right).
unixhero 7y ago
*zsh ... Not "day"

BiteCode_dev 7y ago

"Thirteen Incorrect Ways and Two Awkward Ways to Use Arrays" http://www.oilshell.org/blog/2016/11/06.html http://www.oilshell.org/blog/2016/11/06.html

kohtatsu 7y ago
Yeah I should clarify; I think it's well past the time of sh. Still, sh is unrivaled for portability and brevity/velocity; I wouldn't swap virtually any the shell scripts I've written for python scripts. I think sh is a decent and often well-suited tool if you can manage to wield it properly (not a straightforward endeavor). I look forward to checking out oilshell though, so thank you~ Edit: FWIW for arrays in POSIX sh I generally only use: set -- a b c echo $# echo "$1" shift echo "$@" Once in a blue moon "$*" or maybe an unquoted $@. See 2.5.2 of https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V3_chap02.html https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V... (My go-to reference)