Live data from Hacker News

Pure Sh Bible

github.com

21–30 of 138 posts

Re: Pure Sh Bible

#21
post #7

I have to take exception to some of this; it's "technically correct" but like much of shell, likely full of terrifying edge cases that are best avoided. For instance, using eval to have variables with variable names is madness. $ var="world" $ eval "hello_$var=value" $ eval printf '%s\n' "\$hello_$var" I suppose the fancy business with printf is flexing, but I suspect the majority of people scanning documents like th…

> I suppose the fancy business with printf is flexing, but I suspect the majority of people scanning documents like this would prefer to have examples with echo "${variable%%string_modifier}" POSIX itself contains some interesting notes about `echo` and `printf`, e.g. from the `printf` page: "The printf utility was added to provide functionality that has historically been provided by echo. However, due to irreconcila…

> Similar for `sed` which is often only known and used for "replace string a by string b in input" use cases.

Sed has at least the vi users who may know ex command from the vi command mode. Awk needs to be learned for itself.

Re: Pure Sh Bible

#22

Mildly annoyed when people constantly refer to their article as the Bible of X. For those of us who are religious, it is in poor taste.

Even as someone who grew up in a very religious household, I am still struggling to come up with a “steel-man” argument on your behalf. Can you explain why you believe it is in poor taste?

How common is the expression "Qur'an of X" instead of Bible?

Re: Pure Sh Bible

#23

Mildly annoyed when people constantly refer to their article as the Bible of X. For those of us who are religious, it is in poor taste.

The word "Bible" comes from the greek word "τὰ βιβλία", which quite literally just means "the books". I don't see any issue.

Re: Pure Sh Bible

#24

Mildly annoyed when people constantly refer to their article as the Bible of X. For those of us who are religious, it is in poor taste.

Struggling to see it. Think this might just be a you thing? Maybe talk to a religious leader in your community, they might help you with a different perspective that'll speak to you.

Re: Pure Sh Bible

#25

Mildly annoyed when people constantly refer to their article as the Bible of X. For those of us who are religious, it is in poor taste.

Well, now you know how not-religious people feel about "their" word.

Re: Pure Sh Bible

#26
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even as someone who grew up in a very religious household, I am still struggling to come up with a “steel-man” argument on your behalf. Can you explain why you believe it is in poor taste?

How common is the expression "Qur'an of X" instead of Bible?

What? You appear to be saying nonsense.

Re: Pure Sh Bible

#27
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even as someone who grew up in a very religious household, I am still struggling to come up with a “steel-man” argument on your behalf. Can you explain why you believe it is in poor taste?

How common is the expression "Qur'an of X" instead of Bible?

The "Torah of X" is fairly common.

Re: Pure Sh Bible

#28
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even as someone who grew up in a very religious household, I am still struggling to come up with a “steel-man” argument on your behalf. Can you explain why you believe it is in poor taste?

How common is the expression "Qur'an of X" instead of Bible?

I don't know. This is an English-speaking site.

From the Cambridge Dictionary definition of the English word "bible":

> a book, magazine, etc. that gives important advice and information about a particular subject: Vogue magazine quickly became the bible of fashionable women.

Re: Pure Sh Bible

#29
post #19
post #8

If we're going to be purists, sh is a far cry from bash. /s tongue in cheek, please don't kill me. I love bash and I use it often. I love Greg Wooledge's bash guides and all the people in #bash@libera.

I like busybox bash (especially on Windows) which is very much not bash. Busybox bash does not implement arrays, for starters, which is a deal breaker for many scripts. The Windows kernel forks processes about 10x slower than Linux, so these tricks have real performance value for POSIX-family shells running there.

As far as I can tell, there is no busybox bash.

busybox's built-in shell is ash. There are options to enable a few bash-compatible extensions, but there is no "bash" applet.

Re: Pure Sh Bible

#30

Mildly annoyed when people constantly refer to their article as the Bible of X. For those of us who are religious, it is in poor taste.

It shouldn't. "Bible" etymologically derives from "book", and its meaning denotes an authoritative book, or "the" book on a topic.

While it is true that the "Christian Bible" has customarily been shortened to just "Bible", in principle it is appropriate to call any authoritative book that claims to be "the" book on a topic as a "Bible", without necessarily carrying any religious connotations.

That's not to say that people might not make that link mentally, but technically and etymologically speaking the term is not religious. In the same way that some people may no longer identify as gay=happy, but if you start getting offended about people acting having a "gay old time", then that would say more about your sensitivies than about how people choose to use the word in different contexts.

Post reply on HN