3 ms·
> I'm not sure I follow you but it wasn't a joke. Shell scripts are notoriously error-prone. I absolutely do not trust shell script authors to get everything ri
by MisterTea 10mo ago
> I'm not sure I follow you but it wasn't a joke. Shell scripts are notoriously error-prone. I absolutely do not trust shell script authors to get everything right.
This is an extremely naive take as are the rest of your comments. Any language in the wrong hands is error prone.
- IshKebab 10mo ago> Any language in the wrong hands is error prone. Talk about naive!
- linksnapzz 10mo agoFeel free to implement system utilities in whichever language you feel will completely eliminate the possibility of bugs. I wait with bated breath.
- IshKebab 10mo ago"error-prone" means bugs are more likely than the alternatives. It doesn't mean that the alternatives completely eliminate the possibility of bugs. Come on.
- linksnapzz 10mo agoI wonder what the tally is for "things posted to HN that'll replace bash/ksh/zsh in every respect REAL Soon Now". It's a genre of post unto itself.
- IshKebab 10mo agoWhat language is Systemd written in? I'm pretty sure it's not Bash.
- linksnapzz 10mo agoI've never been able to use systemd as a command interpreter.
- IshKebab 10mo agoAn init system doesn't need to be a command interpreter. Why are you being so obtuse?
- linksnapzz 10mo agoIt doesn't need to be, but there are some advantages in being able to have system startup scripts in the same language that you do one-liners in at the terminal.