51–60 of 100 posts
Disclosure: I'm the author
Project link: https://github.com/ngs-lang/ngs
Enjoy!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but using Python gives you 100 more problems. Would you like to set pip and your package manager on a fight to the death? Or is today the day you learn all about venv? Might as well use Docker. Oh nice, my 600MB script is ready!
That's not really an issue for small scripts, no.
If you do take the time to deal with pip (which, yes, is a problem) you get access to even more batteries that would have been a pain or just flat out impossible with shell.
(& on many distros, you can use your system package manager. I'm not seeing a material difference between a shell script that requires "apt-get install jo" and a Python script that requires "apt-get install python3-requests" or something.)
But either way, for circumstances where shell is the wrong tool for the job, "invoke python in the middle of this shell script because it's a better tool for this particular part of the job" is a strategy I've used before & will keep using, b/c it produces code that isn't riddled with bugs.
I remember that when I worked at Google about a decade ago, there was this common saying: "If the first version of your shell script is more than five lines long, you should have written it in Python." I think there's a lot of truth in that. None of the examples presented in the article look better than had they been written in some existing scripting/programming language. In fact, had they been written in Python or…
> Even though Python isn't the fastest language out there, it's likely still faster than the shell command above. Taking these two command lines: jo -p name=JP object=$(jo fruit=Orange point=$(jo x=10 y=20) number=17) sunday=false >/dev/null python -c 'import json;print(json.dumps({"name": "JP", "object": {"fruit": "Orange", "point": {"x": 10, "y": 20}, "number": 17}, "sunday": False}))' >/dev/null For jo (x86_64, Ro…
I remember that when I worked at Google about a decade ago, there was this common saying: "If the first version of your shell script is more than five lines long, you should have written it in Python." I think there's a lot of truth in that. None of the examples presented in the article look better than had they been written in some existing scripting/programming language. In fact, had they been written in Python or…
python -c "import json; print(json.dumps(dict(a=10, b=False)))"I remember that when I worked at Google about a decade ago, there was this common saying: "If the first version of your shell script is more than five lines long, you should have written it in Python." I think there's a lot of truth in that. None of the examples presented in the article look better than had they been written in some existing scripting/programming language. In fact, had they been written in Python or…
If you're going to use string literal, then echo '{"name": "JP", "object": {"fruit": "Orange", "point": {"x": 10, "y": 20}, "number": 17}, "sunday": false}' is fine as a script
I remember that when I worked at Google about a decade ago, there was this common saying: "If the first version of your shell script is more than five lines long, you should have written it in Python." I think there's a lot of truth in that. None of the examples presented in the article look better than had they been written in some existing scripting/programming language. In fact, had they been written in Python or…
I remember that when I worked at Google about a decade ago, there was this common saying: "If the first version of your shell script is more than five lines long, you should have written it in Python." I think there's a lot of truth in that. None of the examples presented in the article look better than had they been written in some existing scripting/programming language. In fact, had they been written in Python or…
I remember that when I worked at Google about a decade ago, there was this common saying: "If the first version of your shell script is more than five lines long, you should have written it in Python." I think there's a lot of truth in that. None of the examples presented in the article look better than had they been written in some existing scripting/programming language. In fact, had they been written in Python or…
I feel this whenever anyone advocates using jq. It boggles my mind that anyone would want to learn a whole new DSL for something that js makes trivial, especially considering js a much more expressive scripting language anyway
Does it suffer from the Norway problem?
jo -- -b foo=no -s a=12 q=[1,2,3] {"foo":true,"a":"12","q":[1,2,3]}