4 ms·
I think a shell is where running programs is the default, and writing code is secondary. In shok, the code is a DSL for filesystem and job management. I think
by nfoz 13y ago
I think a shell is where running programs is the default, and writing code is secondary. In shok, the code is a DSL for filesystem and job management. I think that's quite a different type of thing than general-purpose scripting languages like Ruby.
My typing barrier for %x(ls) is too high.
- busterarm 13y agobut Ruby is perfectly suited to writing a DSL. There's a large and growing number of system administration tools that use Ruby to do exactly that. You could totally make Ruby turn ": ls" into "%w(ls)", or whatever other symbol. This just seems a lot more work for the same thing.
- nfoz 13y agoSure, but go the extra step: Drop the mandatory :, make just "ls" run ls. Then you need a syntax to get at the programming language, not the other way around. That's all that's happening here. shok could have put ruby or python or some other language behind its {} syntax. That would be less NIH-syndrome, but maybe there's merit to trying something more ambitious. Or maybe not.
- mattengi 13y agoHow about support shebang style block? {#!python do dome python... }