> No language has a simpler api to executing a cli command than bash itself. By definition. Things that are true "by definition" are not usually useful. "No l

> No language has a simpler api to executing a cli command than bash itself. By definition. Things that are true "by definition" are not usually useful. "No language has a simpler api [...] [b]y definition" only if by "executing a cli command" we mean literally interpreting bash (or passing the string through to a bash process). But that's never the terminal[0] goal. The useful question is whether, for the task you might want to achieve, for which you might usually reach for the shell, is there in fact a simpler way. It may very well be that the answer is "no", but support for that is not "by definition". [0]: Edited to add: ugh. Believe it or not, this was not intended.