M
Marc Heiler
"Now why would a Ruby shell be wonderful? "
Aside and above all the niceties of Ruby, its really
about objects and messages - in a shell. A shell on top
of an operating system... or at least its first
citizen.
Where you can think of your whole operating system as
interacting objects doing nice little stuff (without
being restricted to the old unix philosophy of using
tiny non-GUI thingies with odd names to achieve certain
tasks...)
"Imagine a new distro or two of linux: Rinux!!"
I think ultimately, a distro is nothing without
people backing it up. I think this is a little too ambitious,
as far as I know the only really ambitious project
on that (RubyX, later renamed to Heretix) disbanded because
the two main devs no longer had the time (and I also
suspect a little bit, they felt slightly burnt out. But
that is my opinion.)
A shell would be much more of a mundane task ;-)
"I tend to look at things very pragmatically - if you want to write
something that will run _anywhere_, write a sh script."
I think being pragmatic is very good. Personally though,
I feel sh style is not only old and ugly - it is a lot
more limited than ruby. I havent seen DSLs usage or GUI
handling in shell scripts, new ideas seem to neither spread
into shell and its "legacy" so to me its a pretty dead
concept - I always have ruby ready, and even if i carry
it around on an USB stick ...
But sure, shell scripts may have several use cases, even
perl hasn't killed off shell scripts! (But then again
Perl also has no maintained perl shell afaik) ;-)
Aside and above all the niceties of Ruby, its really
about objects and messages - in a shell. A shell on top
of an operating system... or at least its first
citizen.
Where you can think of your whole operating system as
interacting objects doing nice little stuff (without
being restricted to the old unix philosophy of using
tiny non-GUI thingies with odd names to achieve certain
tasks...)
"Imagine a new distro or two of linux: Rinux!!"
I think ultimately, a distro is nothing without
people backing it up. I think this is a little too ambitious,
as far as I know the only really ambitious project
on that (RubyX, later renamed to Heretix) disbanded because
the two main devs no longer had the time (and I also
suspect a little bit, they felt slightly burnt out. But
that is my opinion.)
A shell would be much more of a mundane task ;-)
"I tend to look at things very pragmatically - if you want to write
something that will run _anywhere_, write a sh script."
I think being pragmatic is very good. Personally though,
I feel sh style is not only old and ugly - it is a lot
more limited than ruby. I havent seen DSLs usage or GUI
handling in shell scripts, new ideas seem to neither spread
into shell and its "legacy" so to me its a pretty dead
concept - I always have ruby ready, and even if i carry
it around on an USB stick ...
But sure, shell scripts may have several use cases, even
perl hasn't killed off shell scripts! (But then again
Perl also has no maintained perl shell afaik) ;-)