4 ms·

i think they are all wrong - a next gen shell needs to focus on structured data - hacks like jq and yq need to be made redundant as being part of the shell. I d

i think they are all wrong - a next gen shell needs to focus on structured data - hacks like jq and yq need to be made redundant as being part of the shell. I didn't manage to pursuade redhat that this is going to be a priority (i used to work for them); i still think that this is going to be a priority in the near future.

CodesInChaos 6y ago
There are a couple which attempt this. I think nushell works that way. And powershell, though it sacrifices language independence by using .net objects as its structure.
- mrshu 6y ago
  nushell does indeed work exactly like this. You can check out the demo at https://www.nushell.sh/demo/ https://www.nushell.sh/demo/
hnlmorg 6y ago
There are shells in that list which do exactly that, inc my own shell (murex). It’s very hard to describe a shell in a short paragraph because it’s a tool that crosses a range of domains, such as - interactive development environment (autocompletion, et al) - REPL environment / one liners - programming language - plus support for miscellaneous POSIX features such as job management
lukeschlather 6y ago
I've been working in a Windows shop for 2 years and I'm to the point where I just tell people to rewrite things in Powershell. It has native json support so yes, jq is obsolete. On this list, I've looked at elvish before, it seems like it also is designed to make jq obsolete, and it is much more posixy than Powershell (though I think parts of posix really hold shells like Oil back from being as powerful as Powershell is and something like elvish may be.)
- eterm 6y ago
  For anyone reading not familiar with powershell, even better than native json support it supports actual objects. Not everything needs to be text. Complex data structures deserve first class support in a modern shell.
ilyash 6y ago
> next gen shell needs to focus on structured data Agree completely. I wrote about this "JQ is a symptom" - https://ilya-sher.org/2018/09/10/jq-is-a-symptom/ https://ilya-sher.org/2018/09/10/jq-is-a-symptom/

CodesInChaos 6y ago

There are a couple which attempt this. I think nushell works that way. And powershell, though it sacrifices language independence by using .net objects as its structure.

mrshu 6y ago
nushell does indeed work exactly like this. You can check out the demo at https://www.nushell.sh/demo/ https://www.nushell.sh/demo/

hnlmorg 6y ago

There are shells in that list which do exactly that, inc my own shell (murex). It’s very hard to describe a shell in a short paragraph because it’s a tool that crosses a range of domains, such as - interactive development environment (autocompletion, et al) - REPL environment / one liners - programming language - plus support for miscellaneous POSIX features such as job management

lukeschlather 6y ago

I've been working in a Windows shop for 2 years and I'm to the point where I just tell people to rewrite things in Powershell. It has native json support so yes, jq is obsolete. On this list, I've looked at elvish before, it seems like it also is designed to make jq obsolete, and it is much more posixy than Powershell (though I think parts of posix really hold shells like Oil back from being as powerful as Powershell is and something like elvish may be.)

eterm 6y ago
For anyone reading not familiar with powershell, even better than native json support it supports actual objects. Not everything needs to be text. Complex data structures deserve first class support in a modern shell.

ilyash 6y ago

> next gen shell needs to focus on structured data Agree completely. I wrote about this "JQ is a symptom" - https://ilya-sher.org/2018/09/10/jq-is-a-symptom/ https://ilya-sher.org/2018/09/10/jq-is-a-symptom/