I wrote another comment, I guess I didn't post it. Perl made a run at being the standard middle layer language like bash 30 years ago. Learning perl back then w

I wrote another comment, I guess I didn't post it. Perl made a run at being the standard middle layer language like bash 30 years ago. Learning perl back then was different than for people to learn today. Back then, everybody would have known bash, and awk, and grep, and sed, and perl borrowed the their syntax/semeantics so as soon as you started using it, it was like you alrady knew it. But perl followed a trajectory of being more complicated and less intuitive, so nobody wanted it to replace the shell, but it could have had things gone differently. bash used to be "a shell" and "the shell" before graphical shells became the norm. Now bash is a REPL and programming language, and you need to run an "ANSI terminal shell" to access it :) 1. the command line has a syntax of it's own ("readline", generally standard across different shells, in this instance enforced by bash) and then 2. bash has its own language you can use, turing complete, with if-branches and loops, functions, some return values, global values (env) but also file i/o can be used as up-down argument passing, i/o and you can call readline over and over 3. there are certain conventions for "filters" that fit into the above framework, and they impose a small variety of contentions onto the command lines which nest within readline syntax. it has warts, and I really wish there was a general desire to fix them, but I guess I'm going to have to want it enough to do it myself because i've had the same ideas for 30 yrs now and nothings been happening :( last point, people aren't picking up on the importance some of us place on a language which can script that is the same language that is the command line. We don't want two languages, we want one. i.e. a language with a REPL