4 ms·
Or, they could just learn shell scripting. How much would that cost? I do not understand why the[1] shell... which is a relatively small language... is so dif
by anonymous 13y ago
Or, they could just learn shell scripting. How much would that cost?
I do not understand why the[1] shell... which is a relatively small language... is so difficult for people to learn.
If you can find the time to learn Ruby, what stops you from learning a shell? What is the cost of ignoring it?
1. Preferably something resembling the proposed POSIX standard which might lend to portability. Bash is not necessarily the best choice unless every server you will ever use will be GNU userland/Linux kernel.
- mercurial 13y agoThat's precisely the kind of dismissive comment I needed to read today. You don't seem to have read the link, in which the author makes good points for moving to Ruby, or think that somebody maintaining 20k of complex shell script should actually "learn shell scripting". I'm sure the author is well-informed about shell scripting. While it's certainly convenient in a pitch, it has little support for unit-testing, error handling or other things which are extremely useful to ensure a robust codebase.
- anonymous 13y agoWell, since you seem to have insight as to the reasoning behind others' choices, perhaps you could enlighten us how someone came up with the idea of writing 20K lines of shell and passing it off to a community of Ruby developers as a "command line tool"?
- mercurial 13y agoInsight comes simply from having read the linked page. But at a guess, I'd say it comes from "let's do something small and simple in bash" combined with a bad case of incremental feature creep.