CoreUtils implemented in pure JavaScript
github.com
CoreUtils implemented in pure JavaScript
1–10 of 128 posts
Re: CoreUtils implemented in pure JavaScript
#2For what purpose?
Re: CoreUtils implemented in pure JavaScript
#3I hope the goals are
- short-term : POSIX compliant
- long-term : runs *nix binary / programs
p/s: love anything CLI, so I may be biased
Re: CoreUtils implemented in pure JavaScript
#4For what purpose?
That would come in handy for cross-platform npm 'run' scripts.
Re: CoreUtils implemented in pure JavaScript
#5As far as I can see, what's been implemented is a shell in JavaScript, which emulates a bunch of coreutils by treating them as built-in keywords.
It's kinda cool I guess (I don't use Windows), I just don't get why the tagline is "Cross-platform Linux without the suck". Apart from the phrase "cross-platform Linux" not making sense in this context, I don't see why other implementations inherently "suck".
Re: CoreUtils implemented in pure JavaScript
#6As far as I can see, what's been implemented is a shell in JavaScript, which emulates a bunch of coreutils by treating them as built-in keywords. It's kinda cool I guess (I don't use Windows), I just don't get why the tagline is "Cross-platform Linux without the suck". Apart from the phrase "cross-platform Linux" not making sense in this context, I don't see why other implementations inherently "suck".
I don't understand this at all. UNIX shells suck. Javascript sucks. How could one implement a UNIX shell in Javascript and have it not suck? Does the result suck so bad that it just wraps around becomes good again?
Is the "way forward" recombining and rehashing the terrible technologies everyone is familiar with already, indefinitely?
Re: CoreUtils implemented in pure JavaScript
#7As far as I can see, what's been implemented is a shell in JavaScript, which emulates a bunch of coreutils by treating them as built-in keywords. It's kinda cool I guess (I don't use Windows), I just don't get why the tagline is "Cross-platform Linux without the suck". Apart from the phrase "cross-platform Linux" not making sense in this context, I don't see why other implementations inherently "suck".
I don't understand this at all. UNIX shells suck. Javascript sucks. How could one implement a UNIX shell in Javascript and have it not suck? Does the result suck so bad that it just wraps around becomes good again? Is the "way forward" recombining and rehashing the terrible technologies everyone is familiar with already, indefinitely?
> UNIX shells suck. Javascript sucks. How could one implement a UNIX shell in Javascript and have it not suck?
What do you mean by "UNIX shells suck"? I'm fairly sure most people would consider UNIX shells to be one of the bigger revolutions in computing.
Re: CoreUtils implemented in pure JavaScript
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand this at all. UNIX shells suck. Javascript sucks. How could one implement a UNIX shell in Javascript and have it not suck? Does the result suck so bad that it just wraps around becomes good again? Is the "way forward" recombining and rehashing the terrible technologies everyone is familiar with already, indefinitely?
> UNIX shells suck. Javascript sucks. How could one implement a UNIX shell in Javascript and have it not suck? What do you mean by "UNIX shells suck"? I'm fairly sure most people would consider UNIX shells to be one of the bigger revolutions in computing.
Some people would agree with both statements. UNIX shells are amazing and the recent improvements in their UX and environment integration is great. (git repo status, programming environments, intelligent completion, the whole of oh-my-zsh, ...)
But as soon as you want to do anything moderately interesting, it's better to grab a real programming language, because UNIX shells suck. Escaping failures, whitespace handling, almost-real-arrays, fail-and-continue by default, and many many other reasons you'll fail by accident one day is why they absolutely suck for almost anything past basics.
Re: CoreUtils implemented in pure JavaScript
#9As far as I can see, what's been implemented is a shell in JavaScript, which emulates a bunch of coreutils by treating them as built-in keywords. It's kinda cool I guess (I don't use Windows), I just don't get why the tagline is "Cross-platform Linux without the suck". Apart from the phrase "cross-platform Linux" not making sense in this context, I don't see why other implementations inherently "suck".
[deleted]
Re: CoreUtils implemented in pure JavaScript
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand this at all. UNIX shells suck. Javascript sucks. How could one implement a UNIX shell in Javascript and have it not suck? Does the result suck so bad that it just wraps around becomes good again? Is the "way forward" recombining and rehashing the terrible technologies everyone is familiar with already, indefinitely?
> UNIX shells suck. Javascript sucks. How could one implement a UNIX shell in Javascript and have it not suck? What do you mean by "UNIX shells suck"? I'm fairly sure most people would consider UNIX shells to be one of the bigger revolutions in computing.
Because the shell has a lot of room for improvement. Try powershell for a bit. Look at its design, look at the things it can do that the unix shell has problems with.
Everything's an object. Instead of passing lines of text, you're passing objects, with properties, types, etc. This becomes important because of
Library files are first class citizens. Because the shell is string based, you have to wrap everything up in functions, creating helpers in order to use any sort of function. Powershell makes this trivial, such that you can use functions you wrote elsewhere in your scripts as if they were builtins. Hell, it's trivial to write a webserver that forks multiple processes in powershell.
Yes, the unix shell was revolutionary when it was released, but it's been hamstrung by tradition. The shell is long overdue for letting in more interesting abilties.