11–20 of 61 posts
This is very interesting, but I'm wondering how it compares to just using a dynamic language like Python or Ruby for the same tasks. Curious how the line count to express the same tasks would come out.
The upgrade was a nightmare for so many organizations. It shouldn't be that way but it was.
This would have been great 10-20 years ago, or even at the coining of Unix pipes. By today's standards, however, the syntax feels clunky and dated. I'd like to see contemporary shells like nushell and elvish copy these ideas, with attribution of course, in a more modern way. That is the best way I can see to honor this stagnant project: https://github.com/dspinellis/dgsh
I’m on my phone at the moment and cooking so cannot type any examples, but if I get time, I’ll throw together some comparisons later tonight
This would have been great 10-20 years ago, or even at the coining of Unix pipes. By today's standards, however, the syntax feels clunky and dated. I'd like to see contemporary shells like nushell and elvish copy these ideas, with attribution of course, in a more modern way. That is the best way I can see to honor this stagnant project: https://github.com/dspinellis/dgsh
Murex has had this capability for years. ( https://github.com/lmorg/murex ) I’m on my phone at the moment and cooking so cannot type any examples, but if I get time, I’ll throw together some comparisons later tonight
This is very interesting, but I'm wondering how it compares to just using a dynamic language like Python or Ruby for the same tasks. Curious how the line count to express the same tasks would come out.
There are probably libraries that could help, but then you need to install dependencies which is sad in python for other reasons
This is very interesting, but I'm wondering how it compares to just using a dynamic language like Python or Ruby for the same tasks. Curious how the line count to express the same tasks would come out.
I.e. much faster to use dgsh for a basic processing DAG, much more painful to use dgsh for a large ETL pipeline.
Python with something like Prefect isn't something you'd use a REPL to bang out a one-off on, but it'd be more maintainable. dgsh would let you use a REPL to bang out a quick and dirty DAG.
This is very interesting, but I'm wondering how it compares to just using a dynamic language like Python or Ruby for the same tasks. Curious how the line count to express the same tasks would come out.
There is a lot of stuff for Python which follows the "express computation as a dag" approach, especially Apache Airflow https://airflow.apache.org/
This would have been great 10-20 years ago, or even at the coining of Unix pipes. By today's standards, however, the syntax feels clunky and dated. I'd like to see contemporary shells like nushell and elvish copy these ideas, with attribution of course, in a more modern way. That is the best way I can see to honor this stagnant project: https://github.com/dspinellis/dgsh
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Murex has had this capability for years. ( https://github.com/lmorg/murex ) I’m on my phone at the moment and cooking so cannot type any examples, but if I get time, I’ll throw together some comparisons later tonight
I could not find any mention of DAGs or directed acyclic graphs in the documentation.
However Murex does support CSP-style concurrency. So while there’s no syntax sugar for writing graphs, you can very easily create adhoc pipes and pass them around instead of using stdout / stderr.
So it wouldn’t actually take much to refine that with some DAG-friendly syntax.
In fact maybe that can be my next project…
This would have been great 10-20 years ago, or even at the coining of Unix pipes. By today's standards, however, the syntax feels clunky and dated. I'd like to see contemporary shells like nushell and elvish copy these ideas, with attribution of course, in a more modern way. That is the best way I can see to honor this stagnant project: https://github.com/dspinellis/dgsh
What syntax would you propose?