> Or wait, you mean the resulting command built by xargs may have a type dependent on the arguments produced by find? That's... messy, yeah.
Yes! Thinking about interactive CLIs... yes.
EDIT: I should add: My main point here is that types would constrict the search space to be reasonable, rather than seeing that "1200 commands are available, do you want to show them all?" prompt. I really think we could be doing much better in this space.
Well, it's been sufficient. That doesn't mean we can't improve on it. My point was simply that assigning types doesn't actually change things - it is still the case that every program needs to be able to interpret whatever is generated by every program you want to pipe into it, or you need some kind of translation.
'Classic case, btw: "find ... -print0 | xargs -0 ...". Unless we have pervasive and dependent types, how is any formalism going to know that?'
Dependent types aren't necessary for that. They might be necessary for `find ... $MIGHTBEPRINT0 | xargs $MIGHTBEDASH0`
Edited to add - or wait, you mean the resulting command built by xargs may have a type dependent on the arguments produced by find? That's... messy, yeah.