The shok command shell

Re:The shok command shell by nfoz on Sunday December 29, 2013 @09:15AM (#6979568)

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.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The shok command shell by busterarm on Sunday December 29, 2013 @10:18AM (#6979769)

but 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.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The shok command shell by nfoz on Sunday December 29, 2013 @11:44AM (#6980114)

Sure, 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.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The shok command shell by mattengi on Sunday December 29, 2013 @12:30PM (#6980331)

How about support shebang style block?

{#!python

    do dome python...

}

[ Parent | on HN ]