News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Rule of Silence (2006) by TeMPOraL on Tuesday December 13, 2016 @08:13AM (#13166498)
If you use structured data in a standard format, you can have a single system-wide implementation of a parser and then have each program process the data it needs, already structured in a semantically-meaningful way.

In current, unstructured text reality, each program has to have its own (usually buggy, half-assed) shotgun parser, and it has to introduce semantic meaning back to the data all by itself. And then it destroys all that meaning by outputting its own data in unstructured text.

It works somewhat ok until some updated tool changes its output, or you try and move your script to a different *nix system.

Re:The Rule of Silence (2006) by taneq on Tuesday December 13, 2016 @07:47PM (#13172825)
But if your data is structured in a semantically meaningful way, then your receiving program needs to understand those semantics. Maybe you could introduce new command line tools to refactor streams of data so as to adapt one program to another, but I can't see it being simpler and quicker (in terms of piping input from one place to another) than the current approach.

I do like the idea of a standard parser to avoid the ad-hoc implementation of parsers into everything.

Your last comment gives a hint at the real problem, which is people using command line hackery in 'permanent' solutions. It's duct tape. You don't build important system components out of duct tape. Well, you shouldn't, anyway.