bash_kernel VS icr

For those who don't know, Jupyter has a bash kernel: https://github.com/takluyver/bash_kernel

And you can run Jupyter notebooks from the CLI with Ploomber: https://github.com/ploomber/ploomber

Something like this? https://github.com/takluyver/bash_kernel

I wrote a Crystal kernel for Jupyter, just a modified bash_kernel, 140 lines of code, but it was tiring because I don't have enough Python ability. icrystal is the widely used Jupyter kernel for Crystal, which uses ICR . On the other hand, this crystal_kernel uses the official crystal interpreter.

Thank you! One of my main goals was making data processing in the command-line more accessible and intuitive. If you use a shell you can leverage an extensive array of tools. please take a look at the recipes in the Readme. The shell is many times underrated for data processing!

Right now you can use it in Jupiter Notebooks using a shell kernel like: https://github.com/takluyver/bash_kernel

On the mid-term, developing a spyql kernel is appealing because of syntax highlighting, code autocompleting, and more. But unless several people show interest on this, I should tackle other features first.

I recently learned of jupyter+bash and it seemed like a step toward rundeck.

it's had an IRB-like REPL for years. It just wasn't built into the language. Admittedly it was limited compared to IRB but it was more than enough to test out quick ideas.

It's called ICR: Interactive Crystal

https://github.com/crystal-community/icr

the first release was back in 2017

I wrote a Crystal kernel for Jupyter, just a modified bash_kernel, 140 lines of code, but it was tiring because I don't have enough Python ability. icrystal is the widely used Jupyter kernel for Crystal, which uses ICR . On the other hand, this crystal_kernel uses the official crystal interpreter.