News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:How Bash Completion Works by sdan on Sunday October 06, 2019 @02:28PM (#21173851)
Love the implementation.

Can't help but think about another "startup" or project that uses Machine Learning to predict your bash commands... which in most if not all cases is probably not necessary XD.

Re:How Bash Completion Works by dmd on Sunday October 06, 2019 @03:14PM (#21174299)
Re:How Bash Completion Works by sdan on Sunday October 06, 2019 @04:10PM (#21174761)
Yikes. Yes.

Not sure if other developers agree with me on this: I probably don't need autocompletion, I'm not writing an essay; I'm writing code where every character is a lot more impactful than forgetting a semicolon here or there. For this reason, having autocompletion could probably be an annoyance than helpful.

Re:How Bash Completion Works by hnlmorg on Sunday October 06, 2019 @05:55PM (#21175439)
Personally I'm the exact opposite - weirdly for the same reasons you cited too. When programming I can usually predict what will come next or the compiler will usually slap me if I've done something dumb. Whereas it's easier to miss something in a shell because everything is a little more "golfed" and mistakes can go unnoticed for a while if you're being down-right careless.

I'd love it if there was a way to do a "test run" of a command line where it prints what it would do without actually touching the file system (for example).

Re:How Bash Completion Works by sdan on Sunday October 06, 2019 @06:13PM (#21175533)
Pretty sure a simple "dry run" is what you're looking for. Not sure what programs support it, but I know Docker for one does.
Re:How Bash Completion Works by hnlmorg on Sunday October 06, 2019 @07:00PM (#21175824)
Sorry yes, "dry run".

There are definitely ways of doing it on a command by command basis but what I was more thinking about was a dry run on an entire pipeline. It's not a use case I tend to run into much these days though because there are usually better tools.