Really cool!
A few months ago, I started to use vim mode in shell, for the raw way is not convenient. Furthermore, I have formed an similar idea of "interactive shell", whereas I have to finish my GRE firstly...
Xiki: An amazing shell
81–90 of 130 posts
Re: Xiki: An amazing shell
#82I actually like my shell as it is. I like the old fashion with no mouse interaction except for scrolling. Is it just me? But I have to say the interactive search is appealing.
My approach to CLI is basically: if I wanted to use the mouse, I wouldn't be in the terminal. Having to reach for the mouse is a huge waste of time and I only do it if I need to scroll (rare) or copy+paste (relatively common).
Although since I use OS X (Darwin) I don't always need the mouse to copy+paste (ie. pbcopy -> cmd+V).
Re: Xiki: An amazing shell
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think passing around real objects instead of character strings is cool. It's less brittle, and you don't have to have an ad-hoc and flawed parser at every step.
As someone who thinks powershell and objects are really great.. Until you want to create a firewall rule with a principal exception using the docs: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj554906.aspx . :|
I love PS too but creating a new ACL is very sucky too.
I think PS is so good it exposes the really shit bits MS built decades ago but covered up with a pretty UI.
I'm sure they'll eventually make a pass over these crap parts and refactor them. This must be what they mean by an API driver vs Text driven OS. At least anything nix you just have to spit out a text file and you're good.
Re: Xiki: An amazing shell
#84> "When I was supposed to be doing my boring job as a software dev at banks and insurance companies in Ohio 13 years ago, I started making this thing that let me run commands and navigate files directly from my notes." With all the stories of disgruntled developers complaining that their employer took ownership of something they'd worked on in their spare time , I wouldn't be surprised if his old employers came a kno…
He would have to be very unlucky for that to happen, but admitting it online was perhaps not the best move.
Re: Xiki: An amazing shell
#85I'm personally keeping my eye on the oh shell [0]. It adds some scheme goodness to the shell without throwing familiarity to the wind.
Re: Xiki: An amazing shell
#86> “Originally I created Xiki for my own use,” said Muth. “When I was supposed to be doing my boring job as a software dev at banks and insurance companies in Ohio 13 years ago, I started making this thing that let me run commands and navigate files directly from my notes. Ever since then I’ve found myself unable to resist working on it. I use it for everything.”
Isn't this a bit concerning? It sounds like this was created on employer time with employer resources, yet there is nothing about this in the Kickstarter page itself. It seems like there could be a potential legal issue because of this, but there is no reassurance that either it's already been cleared, or that it's a potential risk.
Seems like a big oversight that might prevent some people who read this from contributing.
Re: Xiki: An amazing shell
#87The most revolutionist change to a shell. The feature i found very much interesting is "in xiki commands can be run from the notes"
We used to call them shell scripts... I mean, it's not particularly new, only now you have to ctrl+enter each individual command.
I think the OP video's demonstrated use-case makes xiki preferable to creating a shell script.
With a shell script if I want to run some copy-pasta from a blog post or somesuch then I need to edit to remove non-script parts, then I'm flitting between shells to make edits that will work. Then I use the script, and remove it. All just to run a few commands; copy paste, edit in place and ctrl+enter to execute seems far slicker to me (but haven't used it yet).
Xiki looks great for navigation too.
Currently I use bash/dash (Kubuntu) and the greatest change to me has been discovering ctrl+R (surprisingly recently!) and a couple of scripts that I made/modified following a post on HN that make an archive of input commands and enable me to grep it easily.
Re: Xiki: An amazing shell
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes you say PS is horribly implemented ?
Just a bunch: Doing really common things, such as "find the directory of the currently executing script" can only by done by copy-pasting a non-trivial 3-line function from Stack Overflow. In batch (of all scripting languages), it's "%~dp0". Cryptic, yes, but at least it's in there. Similarly, the internet is full of blog posts with 1000-word articles explain how "easy" it is to do something in PowerShell that should…
> "find the directory of the currently executing script"
Did you miss `$PSScriptRoot` ? Can piping that to split-path help you out?
Since PS 2.0 you got to write completely equal cmdlets in PS or .NET there's no different at all anymore.
Your link is dated 19 Jun 2007 which would be PS 1.0, 2 years before windows 7 came out. Were on 4.0 now 6 years later maybe it's time for another look.
I feel your reference experience with PS is out of date. You get to grips with how the get-help platform works PS is amazingly consistent. Where it isn't is busting out .NET.
Re: Xiki: An amazing shell
#89I quite like fish and have been using it painlessly for nearly 6 months now. I wish fish included an actual programming language that could replace bash scripts, but the sane advice from fish devs is to use a real programming language instead of bash or another shell script. Other than that I've become quite dependent on the nice autocomplete and suggestions from fish. It just works and I never have to deal with any…
You can go a long way with bash; it's worth learning because it lets you glue tools written in different "real" languages together very easily, as long as they all talk text. There aren't many other languages specifically designed for process control, orchestration and piping. I don't like fish because it has almost no features, compared with bash.
I've never understood why anyone would inflict oneself with bash scripting. If you really need something portable you should use standard /bin/sh anyway since bash is not installed by default everywhere (I believe many linux distros don't even ship with bash anymore, but a lightweight clone called "dash"?).
And if you don't care about portability out of the box, why not use... Well basically anything else? Perl, python, ruby, lua, scheme, whatever.
The only shell scripts I ever write are basically a list of command to execute sequentially. If I need something more complex (control flow, user input, proper error handling, nontrivial string manipulation) I switch to some other programming language, it's just not worth the pain.
Re: Xiki: An amazing shell
#90> “Originally I created Xiki for my own use,” said Muth. “When I was supposed to be doing my boring job as a software dev at banks and insurance companies in Ohio 13 years ago, I started making this thing that let me run commands and navigate files directly from my notes. Ever since then I’ve found myself unable to resist working on it. I use it for everything.” Isn't this a bit concerning? It sounds like this was cr…
Maybe he does own the IP outright. He negotiated for the right to create side projects and has paperwork to prove it?
Or maybe he figures it's his because it's not within the scope of his employment. i.e. -- has nothing to do with banks in and of itself.