4 ms·
Either way, it still speaks to the maintainability of these modern replacements, many of which are personal projects. tools like ls or grep are certainly showi
by mingus88 3y ago
Either way, it still speaks to the maintainability of these modern replacements, many of which are personal projects.
tools like ls or grep are certainly showing their age, but that has also been their strength. The POSIX ecosystem comes in many flavors but I can always depend on it.
It’s not like I can ever expect to shell into any arbitrary system or container and expect to have exa/lsd/rg or any of these nice replacements available to me. My tooling needs to be somewhat more portable.
- Klonoar 3y ago> My tooling needs to be somewhat more portable. Ah yes, because it's 100% impossible to learn new tools and fall back to the core ones when you need to. ;P I've been doing this for decades now, it's just not that big of a deal.
- jjgreen 3y ago... as in if [ -z "$(which exa)" ] then LS1='ls -1' else : fi ${LS1} ${SOME_DIR} | ... ?
- Macha 3y agoI just have in my personal systems ls aliased to exa (with some of my preferred options like group-directories-first) and on other systems it's still ls. So my usage is the same regardless of whether it's exa or ls. This isn't a programming language or a complicated tool like jq vs competitors where what I need to do changes. I just get the nicer presentation on my local machine and "graceful degradation" back to the defaults of GNU ls on remote machines which don't have my preferred setup installed on them.
- dataflow 3y agoIf you do that consider if command -v exa > /dev/null instead, so you don't spawn subprocesses unnecessarily.
- Conscat 3y agoExa is an interactive utility. It doesn't make much sense to put it in a script like that. If you were to use rg or ug instead of grep, branching like that would probably be worthwhile, though.