busybox VS xonsh

Well.

Maybe you have better luck with the Busybox diff: https://github.com/brgl/busybox/blob/master/editors/diff.c

You can use busybox devmem to debug. The source code gives you an idea of how it works to write your own code.

You can fairly easily spot things like recursive search tree implementations in the wild.

Also, compilers and interpreters often recursion, and that goes to as many levels as the program requires.

Have you heard of a "recursive descent parser"? GNU C++ uses one (a huge source file written in C++, well over a megabyte long). This will recurse as deeply as the program's nesting goes; C++ programs often go to more than three levels of nesting. (There are some non-recursive hacks mixed in there, like some operator precedence parsing involving an explicit stack: Shunting-Yard or similar?)

https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/gcc/cp/parser....

Let's switch over to embedded. Have you heard of BusyBox? BusyBox provides scaled down system utilities for embedded systems. It is very widely used.

BusyBox's "libb" internal library contains a function called "recursive_action" for walking file system trees. This is actually recursive, and frequently goes more than three levels deep in actual use:

https://github.com/brgl/busybox/blob/master/libbb/recursive_...

This is used by BusyBox programs like mdev (udev replacement) lsusb, lspci, chmod, ...

Also, HN isn't a good place to exhibit Lisp condescension/ignorance.

This is almost the same implementation you see in busybox's id command source

xonsh – Python-powered, cross-platform, Unix-gazing shell

You need to downgrade ptk version. Look here - https://github.com/xonsh/xonsh/issues/5241#issuecomment-1961...

Friends, I'm not saying that tools like zx are not good. I do like to write some scripts using js/ts. I believe pythoners prefer https://xon.sh/ . Perl is also attractive and interesting. Fish is friendly.

However, I still believe that posix-shell has its own advantages. The balance among size, code length, and expressiveness. I think the only possible competitors are tcl and perl, maybe lua.

Those of you who use (or used) this as your shell: care to share your experience?

It seems a lot less full-featured than https://xon.sh/, but maybe you don't need a lot of bells and whistles for regular usage. I mostly run build, execute, and install commands.

I'm somewhat enticed at the possibility of being able to wrap common executables into forms that are typed (like nushell or elvish) and manipulate them in a way that leverages the type checker.

In that case, is it even more similar to xonsh?

https://xon.sh/