Re: Scripting Additions: Embracing the Horror of Unix
Re: Scripting Additions: Embracing the Horror of Unix
- Subject: Re: Scripting Additions: Embracing the Horror of Unix
- From: Shane Stanley <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2002 08:16:14 +1100
On 2/2/02 3:48 AM +1000, Michael Sullivan, email@hidden, wrote:
>
Is this kind of what you're thinking of Shane?
Not really. I don't have any particularly view about how scripting of the
shell is done. To do it, you obviously have to understand a certain amount
of unix, and as someone pointed out, abstracting all that to AS would be (a)
futile and (b) probably counter-productive.
(The fact that, in all this discussion, no-one has come up with a complete,
robust, ready-to-be-copied-and-pasted handler for any of the missing Jon's
commands suggests it's either not particularly straight forward, or so
simple I'm missing the bleeding obvious.)
My concern is that shell scripting not be seen as the answer to every
scripting request. I think there's still a role for scripting additions,
perhaps without all the switches the shell offers, so scripters rarely *have
to* resort to shell scripting.
--
Shane Stanley, email@hidden