ShellCheck VS oil

If you're only occasionally writing shell scripts, Amber may not be a priority for you. In such cases, linting tools like ShellCheck could be more beneficial. However, if you find yourself frequently writing shell scripts, to the point where you're considering Python or Ruby for better re-usability, then Amber is definitely worth your attention.

As carlinigraphy points out, shellcheck [0] exists, and can easily be put into pre-commits, a CI pipeline, etc. This would have almost certainly flagged your problem immediately.

> I would be willing to learn a sane language, but bash isn't one.

It's a general language that has to be both an interactive interpreter and script executor, and it needs to support a huge variety of architectures and kernel versions, as well as historical decisions. It's going to have some cruft.

[0]: https://www.shellcheck.net/

These projects use Caddy as my local development server, Dart Sass for converting my Sass files to CSS, elm, elm-format, elm-optimize-level-2, elm-review, elm-test (only in Calculator), ShellCheck to find bugs in my shell scripts, and Terser to mangle and compress JavaScript code.

ncurse, dialog, zenity[2]. i/o buffering may be an issue [3a,3b]

Assuming using same account, use history command to show past commands[0a, 0b]

'load random example' on shellcheck using own custom examples from history command.[1]

--------

[3a] : http://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/manual/html_node/stdbu...

[3b] : http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/25372/how-to-turn-of...

[2] : http//funprojects.blog/2021/01/25/zenity-command-line-dialogs/

[1] : http://www.shellcheck.net/

[0a] : http://www.tecmint.com/history-command-examples/

[0b] : http://www.tecmint.com/remember-linux-commands/

web based documentation: https://www.tecmint.com/linux-commands-cheat-sheet/

commands grouped by typical usage patterns : https://www.tecmint.com/essential-linux-commands/

... #************************** Terraform ************************************* ARG TERRAFORM_VERSION=1.7.3 RUN set -ex \ && curl -O https://releases.hashicorp.com/terraform/${TERRAFORM_VERSION}/terraform_${TERRAFORM_VERSION}_linux_amd64.zip && unzip terraform_${TERRAFORM_VERSION}_linux_amd64.zip -d /usr/local/bin/ RUN set -ex \ && mkdir -p $HOME/.terraform.d/plugin-cache && echo 'plugin_cache_dir = "$HOME/.terraform.d/plugin-cache"' > ~/.terraformrc #************************* Terragrunt ************************************* ARG TERRAGRUNT_VERSION=0.55.1 RUN set -ex \ && wget https://github.com/gruntwork-io/terragrunt/releases/download/v${TERRAGRUNT_VERSION}/terragrunt_linux_amd64 -q \ && mv terragrunt_linux_amd64 /usr/local/bin/terragrunt \ && chmod +x /usr/local/bin/terragrunt #*********************** Terramate **************************************** ARG TERRAMATE_VERSION=0.4.5 RUN set -ex \ && wget https://github.com/mineiros-io/terramate/releases/download/v${TERRAMATE_VERSION}/terramate_${TERRAMATE_VERSION}_linux_x86_64.tar.gz \ && tar -xzf terramate_${TERRAMATE_VERSION}_linux_x86_64.tar.gz \ && mv terramate /usr/local/bin/terramate \ && chmod +x /usr/local/bin/terramate #*********************** tfsec ******************************************** ARG TFSEC_VERSION=1.28.5 RUN set -ex \ && wget https://github.com/aquasecurity/tfsec/releases/download/v${TFSEC_VERSION}/tfsec-linux-amd64 \ && mv tfsec-linux-amd64 /usr/local/bin/tfsec \ && chmod +x /usr/local/bin/tfsec \ && terragrunt --version #**********************Terraform docs ************************************ ARG TERRRAFORM_DOCS_VERSION=0.17.0 RUN set -ex \ && curl -sSLo ./terraform-docs.tar.gz https://terraform-docs.io/dl/v${TERRRAFORM_DOCS_VERSION}/terraform-docs-v${TERRRAFORM_DOCS_VERSION}-$(uname)-amd64.tar.gz \ && tar -xzf terraform-docs.tar.gz \ && chmod +x terraform-docs \ && mv terraform-docs /usr/local/bin/terraform-docs #********************* ShellCheck ***************************************** ARG SHELLCHECK_VERSION="stable" RUN set -ex \ && wget -qO- "https://github.com/koalaman/shellcheck/releases/download/${SHELLCHECK_VERSION?}/shellcheck-${SHELLCHECK_VERSION?}.linux.x86_64.tar.xz" | tar -xJv \ && cp "shellcheck-${SHELLCHECK_VERSION}/shellcheck" /usr/bin/ \ && shellcheck --version ...

ShellCheck: https://github.com/koalaman/shellcheck

If I want to write better shell scripts I usually run shellcheck and adjust accordingly or if I need facilities not provided by the shell i switch to a full fledged programming language. Ans oh yes, `sh` is present almost on every BSD and Linux box for free so I consider it an important thing to at least be comfortable with.

shellcheck: https://www.shellcheck.net/

When I run nix-shell at the root of the project it puts me in a Nix shell that contains, among other programs, caddy and shellcheck. Notice that in the shellHook I add the project's shell scripts to the PATH. So once I'm in the Nix shell I can, among other things:

I have also seen some projects on github like ShellCheck which first make a library, expose all the modules and then simple add that do build-depends of the final executable. Is this the recommended approach than having just one executable and adding all the modules to other-modules:?

Is it an array of strings because it's a "simple command"? Or does it behave like an assignment? You get two different answers depending on how you look at it.

The bottom line is that assignment builtins are special and they don't follow the normal rules of simple commands. Shells have differed, but POSIX decided on this awhile ago.

---

This is all of course mind numbing trivia that has no real reason for existing ... YSH fixes it, and it's now pure native C++, no more Python.

YSH Doesn't Require Quoting Everywhere - https://www.oilshell.org/blog/2021/04/simple-word-eval.html (Oil was renamed to YSH since this blog post was written)

Simple Word Evaluation in Unix Shell - https://www.oilshell.org/release/latest/doc/simple-word-eval...

In YSH you can tell just by looking it's a single string or an array.

    ls $a  # identical to ls "$a"

Oils is a different approach to this - the base “OSH” language is pretty much identical to bash, and then you can incrementally opt in to more checks and QOL improvements.

The key selling point is that you never have to totally rewrite your existing bash scripts - there’s an incremental upgrade path.

https://www.oilshell.org/

While I don't agree with most of your analysis - in particular for the second example, I'd invite you to read its explainer that goes into much more depth (https://elv.sh/learn/scripting-case-studies.html#update-serv...) - I think you might be more interested in the Oil Shell project, which is trying to chart a smooth upgrade path from bash: https://www.oilshell.org

I think we simply can't say for sure which path is better for the future of shells, and I'm quite excited by the fact that different projects are exploring different directions. I will just stick to the path I find best and won't try to convert you :)

Some related references (on a somewhat messy wiki page) - https://github.com/oilshell/oil/wiki/Compact-AST-Representat...

Feel free to add others

will prevent almost all of the "silent footguns".

YSH has strict:all and then a bunch of NEW features.

There's been good feedback recently, which has led to many concrete changes. So your experience can definitely influence the language! https://github.com/oilshell/oil/wiki/Where-To-Send-Feedback

Regarding writing tools/tests/benchmarks in bash+Python, vs. writing tools in your main language:

I think we might eventually concede that something Debian-like is the “standard development environment” (at least for server side stuff, i.e. not iOS apps)

In this case, bash+Python is a non-issue. It works extremely reliably. That’s actually why I use it! Everything else seems to break, or it’s really slow (node.js is a very common alternative).

- Microsoft conceded this back in ~2017, by building Linux into their kernel with WSL, and providing Ubuntu on top

Yes bash + Python is a disaster on Windows (I have scars from it), but Microsoft agrees that the right place to solve that is in Windows :-)

- Every CI system runs Debian/Ubuntu

- Every hosting provider runs Debian/Ubuntu

- Every online dev env like gitpod.io provides Debian/Ubuntu

This is somewhat related to remote dev envs: https://lobste.rs/s/ucirlx/lapdev_self_hosted_remote_dev

One vision for https://www.oilshell.org/ is that the CI environment is the dev environment is the hosting environment.

Everything is just an equal node in a distributed system. BUT it’s more git like, in that you explicitly sync and work “locally”, wherever that is. You don’t have the network chatter and flakiness of “the cloud”.

Oils has a very large set of monotonically increasing properties too - https://www.oilshell.org/release/0.21.0/quality.html

All that is bash+Python that is run on every commit, and it’s extremely good at catching bugs and perf regressions.

I’m skeptical that any project has that level of quality automation written in pure Rust or Zig. More likely it’s a bunch of cloud services with YAML.

Also a bunch of “hard-coded” toolchains that you can’t script with bespoke code. Like some shell commands in your package.json, which is just a worse way of writing a shell script.

Our quality process is all self-hosted, in the repo, and runs on both Github Actions and sourcehut - https://www.oilshell.org/release/0.21.0/pub/metrics.wwz/line...

bash and Python runs perfectly on Github Actions and sourcehut, with zero change. Containers also do.

(Although we need to unify the CI and release, because the release runs on 2 different real hardware machines, while CI is cloud only.)

Also, a main point Oils is that bash now has another highly compatible, spec-driven implementation – OSH. Having 2 independent implementations is something newer languages don’t have.

(copy of lobste.rs comment)

in your bashrc to enable it. I've used it for probably ~18 years now.

It also works with https://www.oilshell.org/ since we use GNU readline. Just 'set -o vi' in ~/.config/oils/oshrc

No other shell does that.

But I didn't know it was called MULTIOS until now. (I guess that's read "mult I/O's"? I have a hard time not reading it was multi-OS :) )

It seems a bit niche to be honest, but it's possible to support in Oils.

---

Oils also uses Unix domain sockets already for the headless shell protocol

https://github.com/oilshell/oil/wiki/Headless-Mode

We could do something like dgsh, but so far I haven't seen a lot of uptake / demand. Every time it's mentioned, somebody kinda wants it, and then it kinda peters out again ... still possible though.

I think flat files work fine for a lot of use cases, and once you add streaming, you also want monitoring, more control over backpressure/queue sizes, etc.

which works well. You don't have to clean when rebuilding variants. IMO this is 100% essential for writing C++ these days. You need a bunch of test binaries, and all tests should be run with ASAN and UBSAN.

---

I wrote a mini-bazel on top of Ninja with these features:

https://www.oilshell.org/blog/2022/10/garbage-collector.html...

So it's ~1700 lines, but for that you get the build macros like asdl_library() generating C++ and Python (the same as proto_library(), a schema language that generates code)

And it also correctly finds dependencies of code generators. So if you change a .py file that is imported by another .py file that is used to generated a C++ header, everything will work. That was one of the trickier bits, with Ninja implicit dependencies.

I also use the Bazel-target syntax like //core/process

This build file example mixes low level Ninja n.rule() and n.build() with high level r.cc_library() and so forth. I find this layering really does make it scale better for bigger projects

https://github.com/oilshell/oil/blob/master/asdl/NINJA_subgr...

Some more description - https://lobste.rs/s/qnb7xt/ninja_is_enough_build_system#c_tu...

This is sort of a category error...

re2c is a lexer generator, and YAML and Python are recursive/nested formats.

You can definitely use re2c to lex them, but it's not the whole solution.

I use it for everything possible in https://www.oilshell.org, and it's amazing. It really reduces the amount of fiddly C code you need to parse languages, and it drops in anywhere.