4 ms·
As a learning experience this is a great idea. I think, however, that it would be really useful to note, when applicable, what standard UNIX tool just does a jo
by kwantam 13y ago
As a learning experience this is a great idea. I think, however, that it would be really useful to note, when applicable, what standard UNIX tool just does a job for you (and presumably learning that tool, too)---about 1/3 of these are either completely handled by a standard tool or easily handled with a bash one-liner, and knowing when not to reinvent the wheel is often most of the battle. :)
(I realize that in the intro Zed talks about people being better at finding than building tools. My suggestion is only that you can help even more people by pointing out both paths.)
- daemon13 13y agoIf this is the case, I think it would be to have two solutions - bash one-liner and a Python one, so that it would be easier to understand benefits & drawbacks of both.
- justincormack 13y agoHe is talking about DevOps ie automated programmatic system configuration. The shell is a great human user interface but a terrible programming environment. Its fine for quick hacks but rarely do you see a test suite for shell scripts.
- mathattack 13y agoI don't think the purpose of this is to actually have the tools, it's to go through the mental process of creating them. Similarly, writing compilers in Scheme for every language under the sun may not be the best way to get to produce production strength compilers, but it's a great way to learn languages.