121–130 of 252 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really don't want to start up a separate Linux VM just to open up a shell. (I already crossed out Cygwin / MSYS on the list because of performance issues...)
Also, I need to compile actual Windows binaries using the shell (MSVC, clang-cl), and I obviously can’t do that under a Linux VM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> PowerShell's huge deviance from the rest of the POSIX-y world doesn't help In PowerShell (on Windows), `rm` is an alias to `Remove-Item`[0]. Therefore, rm -r -fo An extra dash, extra space, and extra letter isn't too bad by my books. Furthermore, in scripts, aliases are discouraged by PSScriptAnalyzer[1]; IDEs (PowerShell ISE, VS Code PowerShell extension) also support code completion, so: Remove-Item -Recurse -For…
why do they alias all this stuff. Remove Item is _not_ rm. It's so stupid. Like when they aliased wget and curl to some nonsense web request command and everybody complained that it didn't work. I'll never use PowerShell. Just way too many bad decisions all over the place.
The alias only exists on Windows. Did you read the linked page?
The aliases in this table are Windows-specific. Some aliases aren't available on other platforms. This is to allow the native command to work in a PowerShell session. For example, ls isn't defined as a PowerShell alias on macOS or Linux so that the native command is run instead of Get-ChildItem.
These aliases are meant as stepping-stones for POSIX-first people to get their feet wet with the Windows command-line.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are the features that are done differently, or in other words, why would I choose Nushell over PowerShell?
Error messages are great, autocomplete works out of the box, and commands ArentCamelCaseMonstrocitiesOnlyMicrosoft --CouldLove.
Personally, CamelCase makes more sense than everythinglowercasesmushedinto -onetwothreefourparametersSometimesCapitalised and --sometimesdoubledashed and -Isometimesspacedoesn'tmatter -and --sometimes - "dashlivesalone" --AND -o -- "twodasheslivealone".
Should probably be switched to the official project page rather than a subpage on an unrelated party website: https://www.nushell.sh/ It’s a lot better at introducing Nushell and feels like a proper landing page.
>This is just an example from YAML to JSON, but you can convert much more formats into other formats. >open dev/home-impermanence/tests/impermanence.yml | to json I can do it with PowerShell: $os_list = (Get-Content -Path "C:\temp\operating-systems.yml" | ConvertFrom-Yaml) Set-Content -Path "C:\temp\PowerShell_operating-systems.json" -Value ($os_list | ConvertTo-Json)
With any shell: $ brew install yq $ yq -o json .
Two letter command which I can remember, in the same way that I know jq. And, as a short-form jo. I would not use jo to eat json. I do think that yq is "misnamed" slightly, in that there is no yo command.
(note that I do have yq installed, but not nushell or PowerShell).
shell is glue, not oop -- json is an object notation, converted to stringyness. Which makes for oop->shell. Since "objects" are programmer-think, this should not be the primary command interface. People (not programmers) recognize this, and thus PowerShell is not used by "non-programmers". Ok, you want something above bash (sh, shell), for more programming structure? This is why the #! construct is exec() is so important. That lets you use... um awk, sh, (and should support PowerShell -- not sure). Even C (with tiny-c). I would go with javascript, myself, because it fits with json, and thus jq and jo in the eco-system.
Now, for a criticism of yq -- jq is 30K for a front-end and 350K (or so) for a library. jo is 120K, yq is (gulp) 12MB. Ok, I have the disk space. And it is GO, so ok. Compared with the other GO programs I use commonly: minio (100MB), mcli (mc, 20MB), doctl (20MB), it isn't bad at all. But, I guess that is what GO demands...
Can I teach "functional shell"? Frankly, no. I can get through simple shell in a semester.
Should probably be switched to the official project page rather than a subpage on an unrelated party website: https://www.nushell.sh/ It’s a lot better at introducing Nushell and feels like a proper landing page.
1. A new product
2. An independent party's pro/con opinions about that product
This thread is about #2. If you feel #1 has value on its own, post that.
Read both your link and the OP's. While the topic is the same, the content is markedly different.
I just ported a bunch of scripts to nushell. I hit some bugs, a couple of which are a bit sharp, but wow, the list of quirks I have to remember for nutshell are so much fewer than for bash. Constantly impressed at the errors it catches at parse time, kinda crazy sometimes. Oh my god I could cry, strings are sane to work with. I may never write a bash script again (it's okay, I use Nix so I get nushell everywhere I'm…
Okay, I'll bite - how does it handle filenames with spaces and newlines in them? I have a strong case of Stockholm syndrome with bash because I figured out how to deal with the first one, but I'd love a system that deals with that sanely.
“Newcastle”, “Newport”, “The New iPad”(which was later renamed to a much more logical 3.0)
Do we need a new shell or a few utilities that help produce structured output? For example, `ls | gen_structure | limit 50 | head 5`
That's an interesting project to attempt. An issue that should be considered is that pipes can only pass plain text. So every command should import/export structured text which may impact performance and limit capabilities when compared to a shell that can pipe objects.
Relational data would have the extra advantage over json-like property-based data of being both easier to present on screen (tables) and to interact with (SQL like: where + order + limit would cover most usecases)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
surely something as basic as the location of the config folder can somehow be changed to a custom path, right?
Configuring where configuration data lives can be tricky. (Chicken/egg problem.) But you can certainly create your own symlink.