csh programing book

Frank Shute frank at esperance-linux.co.uk
Mon Dec 17 12:50:59 PST 2007

On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 03:23:52PM -0500, Chuck Robey wrote:
> Chad Perrin wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 02:57:12PM -0500, Chuck Robey wrote:
> >
> >>Actually, I like ksh better, if you are really going all out for a
> >>programming shell, but if you're really after a scripting
> >>language, why restrict yourself to shells?  things like Python &
> >>Ruby knock hell out of both ksh and bash.  That's hardly even
> >>arguable.  Too bad there isn't a good friendly shell-like mode to
> >>Python.  Ruby would be out there, you couldn't even think about
> >>using a OO based tool for a user shell, those things need to be
> >>thought out, and that's the antithesis of being a friendly shell. 
> >
> >Considering I use Ruby's interactive interpreter, irb, all the time -- I
> >don't really agree that you couldn't make a good user shell from Ruby.  A
> >couple of tweaks in the way irb works would make for one of the best user
> >shells I'd ever seen.  All that's missing is an easier way to execute
> >external programs, as far as I can tell.
> >
> Well, I was only giving my personal opinion.  I've never used irb, but 
> it seems to me that using any sort of OO tool as a shell would be "cruel 
> and unusual", but I guess it takes all kinds, and I certainly wouldn't 
> prevent you from enjoying yourself, same as I'd expect from you to mine.

Aren't MS developing an OO shell? Called Monad (although it wouldn't
surprise me if they haven't changed the name).

I suppose we should expect something "cruel & unusual" from them ;) 

Anybody used Vista's Explorer? That's damned cruel, damned unusual and
not remotely funny.




 Contact info: http://www.esperance-linux.co.uk/misc/contact.html 

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list