bash-modules VS murex

Bash is turing-complete, so it's possible to write automated test cases in bash. Example: https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules/blob/master/bash-mo...

Template in article is awful. It's better to use this one, which is a real CLI tool: https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules/blob/master/bash-mo...

IMHO, you are mixing TODO lists and task management/planning software. No, I don't know a good task manager or business process manager for command line. Instead, I created a simpler TODO list manager, called `td`[0], which supports flat TODO lists only, and use directories and command-line generators to manage todo's. `td` prints top item only, by default, leaving little room for procrastination. I'm keeping one `TODO.md` file per project instead of one large TODO file for all todo's.

[0]: https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules/blob/master/bash-mo...

Documentation: http://vlisivka.github.io/bash-modules/ Project home page: https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules

I'm preparing to release bash-modules 4.0 [0]. Can you give me feedback, please? I'm a non-native English speaker, so I need someone to help fix spelling mistakes, at least.

https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules

It works in my shell. :-/ It looks like you forgot to insert `false` command.

You are pointing to the problem with -e not working in subshell/deep functions, because of POSIX. Right? It's described in bash documentation: http://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/html_node/The-Set-Bu...

> I think just defining a die() function and using it after any command that must succeed is more verbose, but less error prone:

Yep. It's the style I developed 12 years ago, when working at Bazaarvoice, when I was lead of devops team. I created the whole library for bash, to use this pattern consistently. See https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules#error-handling

This is how murex works too https://github.com/lmorg/murex/blob/master/config/defaults/p...

I agree. I’ve written about this before but this is what murex (1) does. It reimplements some of coreutils where there are benefits in doing so (eg sed, grep etc -like parsing of lists that are in formats other than flat lines of text. Such as JSON arrays)

Mutex does this by having these utilities named slightly different to their POSIX counterparts. So you can use all of the existing CLI tools completely but additionally have a bunch of new stuff too.

Far too many alt shells these days try to replace coreutils and that just creates friction in my opinion.

1. https://murex.rocks

This is exactly what Murex shell does. It has lots of builtin tools for querying structured data (of varying formats) but also supports POSIX pipes for using existing tools like `jq` et al seamlessly too.

https://murex.rocks

Stable is a problem because a lot of these shells don’t offer any guarantees for breaking changes.

My own shell, https://github.com/lmorg/murex is committed to backwards compatibility but even here, there are occasional changes made that might break backwards compatibility. Though I do push back on such changes as much as possible, to the extent that most of my scripts from 5 years ago still run unmodified.

This is similar to how my shell works. It still just passes bytes around but additionally passes information about how those bytes could be interpreted. A schema if you will. So it works as cleanly with POSIX / GNU / et al tools as it does with fancy JSON, YAML, CSV and other document formats.

It basically sits somewhere between Powershell and Bash: typed pipelines like Powershell but without sacrificing familiarity with all the CLI commands you already use day in and day out.

https://github.com/lmorg/murex

As an aside, I’m about to drop a massive update in the next few days that will make the shell even more intuitive to use.