On Sat, Nov 30, 2019 at 04:01:40PM +0100, Jeff wrote:
> a useful command interpreter should provide some builtins IMO.
> this is much more efficient and avoids excessive exec chaining
> (analoguous to single combined utils for several tasks vs the
> "one task one tool" approach). there might be a very good reason
> shells provide builtin "cd", "umask", "(u)limit" etc ...
>
> i dunno if such builtins would be possible with execline, too.
See also this design:
<
https://skarnet.org/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?1:mss:1169>.
(BTW, that post contributed to the formation of the UP2020 document.)
As was noted by Laurent, language flamewars are off-topic here.
However, I guess discussions on interesting ideas like nosh builtins
are still within the margin of acceptability, as long as we focus on
novel yet feasible chainloading implementions instead of blanket
declarations like "language X is better/worse than language Y".
--
My current OpenPGP key:
RSA4096/0x227E8CAAB7AA186C (expires: 2020.10.19)
7077 7781 B859 5166 AE07 0286 227E 8CAA B7AA 186C
Received on Sat Nov 30 2019 - 15:48:42 UTC