4 ms·

Someone needs to come up with a interactive shell first, one that is comparable in usability. Then we can think about replacing the unix shell. I tried both py

Someone needs to come up with a interactive shell first, one that is comparable in usability. Then we can think about replacing the unix shell. I tried both python and lua interactively, but they are a pain when it comes to handling files. You have to type much more to get the same things done.

anal_reactor 2y ago
The bigger issue is the sheer momentum of Unix shell. Even if you come up with an alternative that is better by every objectively measurable metric, it's still going to be a monumental task to have it packages with commonly used distros. Kinda like the "why can't the US switch to the metric system" problem.
- blueflow 2y ago
  People already use different shells, mksh, fish, and so on. With fish there is a non-posix shell in wide use.
  - oguz-ismail 2y ago
    >wide use Five people around the globe isn't wide use.
    - blueflow 2y ago
      I'm sure you might get more than 5 people on HN replying to you that they are using fish right now. Say something discrediting about fish and they show up.
      - fragmede 2y ago
        Heh, reminds me of how to get help with Linux back in the day. If you directly asked for help, you'd be told to RTFM. If you stayed confidently that Windows could do something and that Linux sucks because it can't, you'd get users tripping over themselves with details and instructions,'just to prove you wrong. Human psychology is fascinating!
- azalemeth 2y ago
  There's a direct cost in money, time and lives that has come from the US's adherence to their US Customary Units (which are often different to the old imperial units). People have literally died because of the confusion caused by having multiple systems of units in common use with ambiguous names (degrees, gallons, etc). Each year industry worldwide spends an enormous amount of money indirectly precisely because of this problem and it's still incredibly unlikely to be fixed within my lifetime. Bash-alternatives that are not completely compatible frankly just don't have a chance.
- stephenr 2y ago
  If it isn't distributed out of the box with every nix-like OS, it inherently isn't* “better by every objectively measurable metric" - distribution of a common, stable standard is a huge benefit in and of itself.
  - blueflow 2y ago
    > distributed out of the box with every nix-like OS, Python and lua are pretty close to that.
    - stephenr 2y ago
      > Python and lua are pretty close to that. Python maybe often installed by default but it's definitely not an essential/required package "out of the box" on every install. Also, in a thread where one topic is how POSIX shell handles whitespace in filenames, it's hilarious (not in a good way) that someone suggests a language that handles whitespace the wrong way in it's own code. Yes, significant whitespace is objectively wrong. What OS/distro is Lua included on out of the box? That doesn't mean "available in a package". I mean literally included in every single install and cannot reasonably be omitted? Regardless of the availability, the parent comment says > better by every objectively measurable metric Neither Python nor Lua are "better" than shell, at the types of things shell is commonly used for - they're objectively worse.
      - blueflow 2y ago
        Lua gets onto every other Linux distro as dependency of some base system component. For example, rpm or pipewire depend on lua. Ubuntu and Debian ship with pipewire per default. You should use the word "objectively" less.
        stephenr 2y ago
        > Lua gets onto every other Linux distro Just FYI, there are UNIX-like, POSIX compatible systems that are not a Linux distro. > rpm or pipewire depend on lua. Ubuntu and Debian ship with pipewire per default. Pipewire? Do you mean this? https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/pipewire https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/pipewire That isn't even close to "installed on every system". Best I can tell from the reverse dependencies, it's required for some Gnome Remote Desktop tool, and best I can tell, it doesn't rely on Lua anyway (at least on Debian). > You should use the word "objectively" less. I specifically used the word objectively, because the original comment that I replied to, said this: > better by every objectively measurable metric
- Netch 2y ago
  OK let them add an explicit check to standard tools, and/or to open(), mkdir(), etc. with O_PORTABLECHARS. And an environment option to disable this check. Why they force the restriction at syscall level?
nly 2y ago
Oil shell? https://www.oilshell.org/ https://www.oilshell.org/ Compatible with most bash scripts
throw16180339 2y ago
I certainly have my complaints about Powershell, but it's got pretty good coverage, decent documentation, and cross platform support.
- felixgallo 2y ago
  if it weren't so irregular, inconsistent, spotty and tasteless, it'd be a great option.

anal_reactor 2y ago

The bigger issue is the sheer momentum of Unix shell. Even if you come up with an alternative that is better by every objectively measurable metric, it's still going to be a monumental task to have it packages with commonly used distros. Kinda like the "why can't the US switch to the metric system" problem.

blueflow 2y ago
People already use different shells, mksh, fish, and so on. With fish there is a non-posix shell in wide use.
- oguz-ismail 2y ago
  >wide use Five people around the globe isn't wide use.
  - blueflow 2y ago
    I'm sure you might get more than 5 people on HN replying to you that they are using fish right now. Say something discrediting about fish and they show up.
    - fragmede 2y ago
      Heh, reminds me of how to get help with Linux back in the day. If you directly asked for help, you'd be told to RTFM. If you stayed confidently that Windows could do something and that Linux sucks because it can't, you'd get users tripping over themselves with details and instructions,'just to prove you wrong. Human psychology is fascinating!
azalemeth 2y ago
There's a direct cost in money, time and lives that has come from the US's adherence to their US Customary Units (which are often different to the old imperial units). People have literally died because of the confusion caused by having multiple systems of units in common use with ambiguous names (degrees, gallons, etc). Each year industry worldwide spends an enormous amount of money indirectly precisely because of this problem and it's still incredibly unlikely to be fixed within my lifetime. Bash-alternatives that are not completely compatible frankly just don't have a chance.
stephenr 2y ago
If it isn't distributed out of the box with every nix-like OS, it inherently isn't* “better by every objectively measurable metric" - distribution of a common, stable standard is a huge benefit in and of itself.
- blueflow 2y ago
  > distributed out of the box with every nix-like OS, Python and lua are pretty close to that.
  - stephenr 2y ago
    > Python and lua are pretty close to that. Python maybe often installed by default but it's definitely not an essential/required package "out of the box" on every install. Also, in a thread where one topic is how POSIX shell handles whitespace in filenames, it's hilarious (not in a good way) that someone suggests a language that handles whitespace the wrong way in it's own code. Yes, significant whitespace is objectively wrong. What OS/distro is Lua included on out of the box? That doesn't mean "available in a package". I mean literally included in every single install and cannot reasonably be omitted? Regardless of the availability, the parent comment says > better by every objectively measurable metric Neither Python nor Lua are "better" than shell, at the types of things shell is commonly used for - they're objectively worse.
    - blueflow 2y ago
      Lua gets onto every other Linux distro as dependency of some base system component. For example, rpm or pipewire depend on lua. Ubuntu and Debian ship with pipewire per default. You should use the word "objectively" less.
      - stephenr 2y ago
        > Lua gets onto every other Linux distro Just FYI, there are UNIX-like, POSIX compatible systems that are not a Linux distro. > rpm or pipewire depend on lua. Ubuntu and Debian ship with pipewire per default. Pipewire? Do you mean this? https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/pipewire https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/pipewire That isn't even close to "installed on every system". Best I can tell from the reverse dependencies, it's required for some Gnome Remote Desktop tool, and best I can tell, it doesn't rely on Lua anyway (at least on Debian). > You should use the word "objectively" less. I specifically used the word objectively, because the original comment that I replied to, said this: > better by every objectively measurable metric
Netch 2y ago
OK let them add an explicit check to standard tools, and/or to open(), mkdir(), etc. with O_PORTABLECHARS. And an environment option to disable this check. Why they force the restriction at syscall level?

nly 2y ago

Oil shell? https://www.oilshell.org/ https://www.oilshell.org/ Compatible with most bash scripts

throw16180339 2y ago

I certainly have my complaints about Powershell, but it's got pretty good coverage, decent documentation, and cross platform support.

felixgallo 2y ago
if it weren't so irregular, inconsistent, spotty and tasteless, it'd be a great option.