5 ms·

What to do instead: use pwsh to completely obviate all these issues.

by g15jv2dp 2y ago

Qwertious 2y ago
Or, once it's API-stable, use nushell.
- DonHopkins 2y ago
  Python has had an API-stable module for listing directories for decades, you know.
Aerbil313 2y ago
Do you recommend it? I feel like I'd get RSI from pressing shift when using it. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/module/microsoft.powershell.core/?view=powershell-7.4 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/module/microsof...
- gfv 2y ago
  Powershell is mostly case-insensitive, and most of the core cmdlets have short aliases. Try `Get-Alias` (or `gal`) to learn more.
- shiandow 2y ago
  It's case insensitive for what it's worth. My main problem is trying to figure out which utilities they've bundled into which command.
- g15jv2dp 2y ago
  Yes, I absolutely recommend it. I use it every day. Commands and flags are case-insensitive.
DonHopkins 2y ago
Isn't it ironic that Powershell from Microsoft is so much vastly superior than bash, not because it's great or even better than Python, but because bash is such a terribly low bar to beat, that it totally undermines the "Unix Philosophy"? Who would have thought that little old Microsoft, purveyors of MSDOS CMD.EXE, would have leapfrogged Unix and come out with something so important and fundamental as a shell that was superior to all of Unix's "standard" sh/csh/bash/whatever shells in so many ways, all of which historically used to be and ridiculously still are touted by Unix Supremacists as one of its greatest strengths? You see, Microsoft is willing to look at the flaws in their own software, and the virtues of their competitors' software, then admit that they made mistakes, and their competitors did something right, and finally fix their own shit, unlike so many fanatical monolinguistic Unix evangelists. They did the exact same thing to Java and JavaScript, leaving Visual Basic and CMD.EXE behind in the dustbin of history -- just like Unix should leave bash behind -- resulting in great cross platform languages like C# and TypeScript. Edit: that reinforces my point that taking so long to get there is a hell of a lot better than taking MUCH LONGER to NOT get there. Maybe bash's legacy inertia is a problem, not a virtue. Is certainly isn't getting a JSON parser in the foreseeable future. The ironic point is that even Microsoft's power shell has much less legacy inertia, and therefore is so much better, in such a shorter amount of time.
- crispyambulance 2y ago
  > Isn't it ironic that Powershell from Microsoft is so much vastly superior than bash I agree that powershell is now better than bash. But it took SO LONG to get there. Moreover, bash has had a 12 year head-start (ok, 30 if you count earlier unix shells). Bash has legacy inertia. Even though you can now supposedly run powershell in linux, I don't know anyone who does. Does anybody? That said, I think powershell is great for utility-knife uses on windows machines.
  - g15jv2dp 2y ago
    > Even though you can now supposedly run powershell in linux, I don't know anyone who does. Does anybody? I do. I replaced all of the automation scripts on my rpi with pwsh scripts, and I'm not regretting it. Not having to deal with decades of cruft in argument parsing and string handling, learning little DSLs for every command, etc. is so worth it.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- kbolino 2y ago
  At this point, all PowerShell has accomplished is creating a separate ecosystem. The designers set out to make a "better" shell and yet refused to ever learn the things they were allegedly "improving". Basic features are still lacking from PowerShell that have been in UNIX shells since the very beginning: https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/issues/3316 https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/issues/3316 But hey, that's a fixable problem, right? No, because PowerShell is so suffused with arrogance about its superiority that anything, no matter how simple it was to do in a UNIX shell, has to be cross-examined, re-imagined, and bent over the wheel of PowerShell's superiority, before ultimately getting ignored or rejected anyway. PowerShell is a language unto itself. It is not a replacement for bash/zsh/etc because nobody who knows the latter well can easily migrate to the former, and that's by design.
  - g15jv2dp 2y ago
    Some very strong sentiments about a shell...
alganet 2y ago
Alternative shells or higher languages don't solve _all_ the issues. I won't install a new shell to generate a file list on my CI server. I won't install a new shell on remote machines. Ever. These structured shells also require commands to be aware of them, either via some plugin that structures their raw I/O output or some convention. They solve _some_ command output structuring but not _all_ the general problem. So, the answer is good. It promotes the idea that one should be careful when machine parsing output meant for humans.
- g15jv2dp 2y ago
  > I won't install a new shell to generate a file list on my CI server. I won't install a new shell on remote machines. Ever. Uh... that's on you? Why do you intentionally hinder yourself? > These structured shells also require commands to be aware of them, either via some plugin that structures their raw I/O output or some convention. They solve _some_ command output structuring but not _all_ the general problem. Okay. It doesn't solve literally every single problem, that is true. It's still miles ahead. And when interfacing with non-pwsh commands, you just fall back to text parsing/output.
  - alganet 2y ago
    > Uh... that's on you? Why do you intentionally hinder yourself? Hinder myself? An ephemeral cloud machine would not keep my custom shell anyway. By having to install it _every single time I connect_ I just loose precious time. I want to be familiar with tools that are _already_ installed everywhere. The shell is supposed to be a bottom feeder, lowest common denominator, barely usable tool. That way, it can build soon and get stable real fast. That (unintentional) strategy placed it as a core infrastructural piece... everywhere. Of course, there's scripting and using it on the terminal. But we're talking about scripting, right? Parsing ls and stuff. I want the fast, lean, simple `dash` to parse my fast, lean simple scripts. pwsh is fine for the terminal leather seats.
    - Kwpolska 2y ago
      Ephemeral cloud machines are created from images. Build your own image with the tools you need.
eikenberry 2y ago
If you're going to skip using the standard shell that is installed everywhere by default, then you should go ahead and use a full language with easily distributed binaries.

What to do instead: use pwsh to completely obviate all these issues.

Qwertious 2y ago

Or, once it's API-stable, use nushell.

DonHopkins 2y ago
Python has had an API-stable module for listing directories for decades, you know.

Aerbil313 2y ago

Do you recommend it? I feel like I'd get RSI from pressing shift when using it. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/module/microsoft.powershell.core/?view=powershell-7.4 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/module/microsof...

gfv 2y ago
Powershell is mostly case-insensitive, and most of the core cmdlets have short aliases. Try `Get-Alias` (or `gal`) to learn more.
shiandow 2y ago
It's case insensitive for what it's worth. My main problem is trying to figure out which utilities they've bundled into which command.
g15jv2dp 2y ago
Yes, I absolutely recommend it. I use it every day. Commands and flags are case-insensitive.

DonHopkins 2y ago

Isn't it ironic that Powershell from Microsoft is so much vastly superior than bash, not because it's great or even better than Python, but because bash is such a terribly low bar to beat, that it totally undermines the "Unix Philosophy"? Who would have thought that little old Microsoft, purveyors of MSDOS CMD.EXE, would have leapfrogged Unix and come out with something so important and fundamental as a shell that was superior to all of Unix's "standard" sh/csh/bash/whatever shells in so many ways, all of which historically used to be and ridiculously still are touted by Unix Supremacists as one of its greatest strengths? You see, Microsoft is willing to look at the flaws in their own software, and the virtues of their competitors' software, then admit that they made mistakes, and their competitors did something right, and finally fix their own shit, unlike so many fanatical monolinguistic Unix evangelists. They did the exact same thing to Java and JavaScript, leaving Visual Basic and CMD.EXE behind in the dustbin of history -- just like Unix should leave bash behind -- resulting in great cross platform languages like C# and TypeScript. Edit: that reinforces my point that taking so long to get there is a hell of a lot better than taking MUCH LONGER to NOT get there. Maybe bash's legacy inertia is a problem, not a virtue. Is certainly isn't getting a JSON parser in the foreseeable future. The ironic point is that even Microsoft's power shell has much less legacy inertia, and therefore is so much better, in such a shorter amount of time.

crispyambulance 2y ago
> Isn't it ironic that Powershell from Microsoft is so much vastly superior than bash I agree that powershell is now better than bash. But it took SO LONG to get there. Moreover, bash has had a 12 year head-start (ok, 30 if you count earlier unix shells). Bash has legacy inertia. Even though you can now supposedly run powershell in linux, I don't know anyone who does. Does anybody? That said, I think powershell is great for utility-knife uses on windows machines.
- g15jv2dp 2y ago
  > Even though you can now supposedly run powershell in linux, I don't know anyone who does. Does anybody? I do. I replaced all of the automation scripts on my rpi with pwsh scripts, and I'm not regretting it. Not having to deal with decades of cruft in argument parsing and string handling, learning little DSLs for every command, etc. is so worth it.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
kbolino 2y ago
At this point, all PowerShell has accomplished is creating a separate ecosystem. The designers set out to make a "better" shell and yet refused to ever learn the things they were allegedly "improving". Basic features are still lacking from PowerShell that have been in UNIX shells since the very beginning: https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/issues/3316 https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/issues/3316 But hey, that's a fixable problem, right? No, because PowerShell is so suffused with arrogance about its superiority that anything, no matter how simple it was to do in a UNIX shell, has to be cross-examined, re-imagined, and bent over the wheel of PowerShell's superiority, before ultimately getting ignored or rejected anyway. PowerShell is a language unto itself. It is not a replacement for bash/zsh/etc because nobody who knows the latter well can easily migrate to the former, and that's by design.
- g15jv2dp 2y ago
  Some very strong sentiments about a shell...

alganet 2y ago

Alternative shells or higher languages don't solve _all_ the issues. I won't install a new shell to generate a file list on my CI server. I won't install a new shell on remote machines. Ever. These structured shells also require commands to be aware of them, either via some plugin that structures their raw I/O output or some convention. They solve _some_ command output structuring but not _all_ the general problem. So, the answer is good. It promotes the idea that one should be careful when machine parsing output meant for humans.

g15jv2dp 2y ago
> I won't install a new shell to generate a file list on my CI server. I won't install a new shell on remote machines. Ever. Uh... that's on you? Why do you intentionally hinder yourself? > These structured shells also require commands to be aware of them, either via some plugin that structures their raw I/O output or some convention. They solve _some_ command output structuring but not _all_ the general problem. Okay. It doesn't solve literally every single problem, that is true. It's still miles ahead. And when interfacing with non-pwsh commands, you just fall back to text parsing/output.
- alganet 2y ago
  > Uh... that's on you? Why do you intentionally hinder yourself? Hinder myself? An ephemeral cloud machine would not keep my custom shell anyway. By having to install it _every single time I connect_ I just loose precious time. I want to be familiar with tools that are _already_ installed everywhere. The shell is supposed to be a bottom feeder, lowest common denominator, barely usable tool. That way, it can build soon and get stable real fast. That (unintentional) strategy placed it as a core infrastructural piece... everywhere. Of course, there's scripting and using it on the terminal. But we're talking about scripting, right? Parsing ls and stuff. I want the fast, lean, simple `dash` to parse my fast, lean simple scripts. pwsh is fine for the terminal leather seats.
  - Kwpolska 2y ago
    Ephemeral cloud machines are created from images. Build your own image with the tools you need.

eikenberry 2y ago

If you're going to skip using the standard shell that is installed everywhere by default, then you should go ahead and use a full language with easily distributed binaries.