3 ms·

aaah, that's a great idea for interleaving comments, I'll have to use that! thanks! previously I've done this, which works, but is a bit....... yeah. som

by Groxx 4y ago

aaah, that's a great idea for interleaving comments, I'll have to use that! thanks! previously I've done this, which works, but is a bit....... yeah. some command \ `# did you know comments work inside backticks like this?` \ --complex_flag_needing_descriptions=... \ `# literally any ffmpeg flag` \ --lol no now if only shellcheck would support zsh....

remram 4y ago
For completeness, the other option is: CMD="some command" # Some comment CMD="$CMD --verbose --complex-flag=..." # Other stuff CMD="$CMD --lol=\"no thanks\"" eval $CMD
- Groxx 4y ago
  yeah, I just don't like dealing with the possibly-multiple-levels of escaping that sometimes requires :\ there are ways to deal with that of course, but it's kinda unavoidably more complex.
Beltalowda 4y ago
> now if only shellcheck would support zsh Since the default zsh behaviour is much more reasonable (e.g. just $foo won't do globbing or word splitting) and you don't really need POSIX compatibility if you're going to use zsh-specific features, the need for shellcheck is hugely less than what you need with bash or POSIX sh.
- nerdponx 4y ago
  Still, it would be pretty handy. For example a good Zsh linter could warn you if you use a Bashism that isn't valid in Zsh, or it could switch to Posix mode if you set `emulate sh`, or warn you when an autoload function file is missing its function call at the bottom, etc.
  - Beltalowda 4y ago
    Sure, but that's "only" useful warnings/errors of that kind that are useful for any language, rather than footguns that work on first approximation and then don't ($*, unquoted $@, unquoted $var, stuff like that). A zsh LSP would be nice as well.
    - nerdponx 4y ago
      Very fair! I bet you could use the C "module" interface to write the Zsh LSP in Zsh itself...
      - Beltalowda 4y ago
        There's https://github.com/zsh-users/zsh-syntax-highlighting https://github.com/zsh-users/zsh-syntax-highlighting which does some parsing, but I never looked at the details of it (I just know it exists).

by Groxx 4y ago

remram 4y ago

For completeness, the other option is: CMD="some command" # Some comment CMD="$CMD --verbose --complex-flag=..." # Other stuff CMD="$CMD --lol=\"no thanks\"" eval $CMD

Groxx 4y ago
yeah, I just don't like dealing with the possibly-multiple-levels of escaping that sometimes requires :\ there are ways to deal with that of course, but it's kinda unavoidably more complex.

Beltalowda 4y ago

> now if only shellcheck would support zsh Since the default zsh behaviour is much more reasonable (e.g. just $foo won't do globbing or word splitting) and you don't really need POSIX compatibility if you're going to use zsh-specific features, the need for shellcheck is hugely less than what you need with bash or POSIX sh.

nerdponx 4y ago
Still, it would be pretty handy. For example a good Zsh linter could warn you if you use a Bashism that isn't valid in Zsh, or it could switch to Posix mode if you set `emulate sh`, or warn you when an autoload function file is missing its function call at the bottom, etc.
- Beltalowda 4y ago
  Sure, but that's "only" useful warnings/errors of that kind that are useful for any language, rather than footguns that work on first approximation and then don't ($*, unquoted $@, unquoted $var, stuff like that). A zsh LSP would be nice as well.
  - nerdponx 4y ago
    Very fair! I bet you could use the C "module" interface to write the Zsh LSP in Zsh itself...
    - Beltalowda 4y ago
      There's https://github.com/zsh-users/zsh-syntax-highlighting https://github.com/zsh-users/zsh-syntax-highlighting which does some parsing, but I never looked at the details of it (I just know it exists).