News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:What should a Ruby shell look like? by hayeah2 on Thursday March 19, 2009 @02:11PM (#523710)
ya, i think the significance of rubish (to myself anyway) isn't so much interactivity (it's plausible, but not convincing), but this potential to abstract my personal usage pattern in Ruby.

abstraction is a form of memory.

Re:What should a Ruby shell look like? by jballanc on Thursday March 19, 2009 @03:21PM (#523845)
First: Thanks! I've been meaning to do exactly this once I had even a spare moment (consider yourself forked! ;-)...

Second: I think where this will really shine is in the "twilight zone" of shell scripting. So often, I start off with a short chain of commands on the command prompt. I'll keep adding to the chain, until at some point I feel the need to move this elaborate chain (usually an alias at that point) into it's own script file. I could copy directly, but then any improvements would require continuing to use shell script (ugh). On the other hand, I could translate the existing script to Ruby, but then I'd have to put in the overhead to do the translation with no immediate gain.

With this, I could see doing a direct copy-->paste from command line to script file and just keep going...or better yet, since it's all Ruby, why not an extension on File to automatically write out X lines of history to a script file?

...oooooh! I'm excited already!