Our great sponsors
mojo | nushell | |
---|---|---|
20 | 212 | |
21,199 | 29,963 | |
19.1% | 2.8% | |
9.9 | 9.9 | |
4 days ago | 3 days ago | |
Mojo | Rust | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | MIT License |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
mojo
- The Mojo Programming Language
- Mojo language goes open source
-
The Mojo programming language has changed its version numbering. Release v24.1.1
https://github.com/modularml/mojo/blob/main/LICENSE Is this not it?
-
Dada, an Experiement by the Creators of Rust
Interesting, but the intent seems similar to Chris Lattner's new Mojo language which arguably has similar characteristics and is further along in its development.
https://docs.modular.com/mojo/
-
Mojo - A New Programming Language for AI
Mojo is a programming language that combines the performance and control inherent in systems languages like C++ and Rust with the flexibility and simplicity of use typical of dynamic languages like Python. Because of its combination of performance, extensibility, and usability, its design makes it possible to construct high-performance systems, which makes it a good option for AI development.
-
Mojo is now available on Mac
If you take a look at the optimized Mojo code doing the matrix multiply [1], it takes an expert to understand. It’s not just some simple for-loops in Mojo they’re comparing against.
[1] https://github.com/modularml/mojo/blob/5ce18c47a27c0c4123de1...
-
Programming Languages Every Developer Should Watch Out For
Mojo truly unlocks a world of possibilities in high-performance computing.
-
A Gentle Introduction to Liquid Types
For a concrete example of Liquid Haskell, see how Gabriella Gonzalez safely removed bound checks of high-performance protocol parsing, in "Scrap your Bounds Checks with Liquid Haskell" [1].
With Liquid Haskell, the bound checks are moved from runtime to compile time, semi-automatically handled by SMT-solvers. With static types, programmers can write correct programs faster, and the programs also run faster.
As an aside, speeding up programs with static analysis (constrained dynamism) are also present in Mojo (a variant of Python) or Swift [2].
[1]: https://github.com/Gabriella439/slides/blob/main/liquidhaske... "Scrap your Bounds Checks with Liquid Haskell"
[2]: https://github.com/modularml/mojo/discussions/466 "Mojo and Dynamism"
- Mojo and Dynamism
nushell
-
NuShell - Ceci n'est pas une |
These are just three small examples of what this shell written in Rust allows. The features are many and many more, but I'll leave it up to you to discover and enjoy them; I'm currently playing around with it and it's giving me a lot of satisfaction and immediacy, now it has a fixed place among the tools I use when working! The project is Open Source, so if you want to contribute, I invite you, as always, to do so, I leave you the link to the repo here!
- Xonsh: Python-powered, cross-platform, Unix-gazing shell
-
Fish shell 3.7.0: last release branch before the full Rust rewrite
Any thoughts on fish as compared to nushell [0]? It's similar to PowerShell in its philosophy and is also written in Rust.
[0] https://github.com/nushell/nushell
-
jc: Converts the output of popular command-line tools to JSON
> In PowerShell, structured output is the default and it seems to work very well.
PowerShell goes a step beyond JSON, by supporting actual mutable objects. So instead of just passing through structured data, you effectively pass around opaque objects that allow you to go back to earlier pipeline stages, and invoke methods, if I understand correctly: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/module/microsof....
I'm rather fond of wrappers like jc and libxo, and experimental shells like https://www.nushell.sh/. These still focus on passing data, not objects with executable methods. On some level, I find this comfortable: Structured data still feels pretty Unix-like, if that makes sense? If I want actual objects, then it's probably time to fire up Python or Ruby.
Knowing when to switch from a shell script to a full-fledged programming language is important, even if your shell is basically awesome and has good programming features.
-
Ripgrep is faster than {grep, ag, Git grep, ucg, pt, sift}
Maybe if the "popular" shells, but http://www.nushell.sh/ is looking better and better
- "<ESC>[31M"? ANSI Terminal security in 2023 and finding 10 CVEs
-
jq 1.7 Released
Yeah agreed, especially now that PowerShell is available cross-platform.
Nushell[1] also seems like a promising alternative, but I haven’t had a chance to play with it yet.
[1]: https://www.nushell.sh/
-
The Case for Nushell
I also discovered an existing discussion[1] related to this topic which includes a link[2] to a "helper to call nushell nuon/json/yaml commands from bash/fish/zsh" and a comment[3] that the current nushell dev focus is "on getting the experience inside nushell right and [we] probably won't be able to dedicate design time to get the interface of native Nu commands with an outside POSIX shell right and stable.".
[0] https://gitlab.com/RancidBacon/notes_public/-/blob/main/note...
[1] "Expose some commands to external world #6554": https://github.com/nushell/nushell/issues/6554
[2] https://github.com/cruel-intentions/devshell-files/blob/mast...
[3] https://github.com/nushell/nushell/issues/6554#issuecomment-...
I appreciate what projects like Nushell and Murex are trying to address, but having a saner scripting language and passing structured data in pipelines is not worth the drawbacks for me.
For one, Bash scripting is not so bad if you set some sane defaults and use ShellCheck. Sure, it has its quirks, but all languages do. Even so, the same golden rule applies: use a "real" programming language if your problem exceeds a certain level of complexity. This is relative and will depend on your discomfort threshold, but using the right tool for the job is always a good practice. No matter how good the shell language is, I would hesitate to write and maintain a complex project in it.
And for general QoL improvements with interactive use, Zsh is a fine shell, while still being POSIX compatible.
[1]: https://github.com/nushell/nushell/blob/main/crates/nu-comma...
[2]: https://github.com/nushell/nushell/issues/5027
[3]: https://github.com/nushell/nushell/issues/9310
-
Simple PowerShell things allowing you to dig a bit deeper than usual
I found nushell (https://www.nushell.sh) to be an impressive replacement "bash" for Windows
In terms of philosophy, think "Powershell but actually intuitive" : Every data is structured but command names are what you expect them to be. I usually don't even need to look at the documentation.
I liked it so much that I also replaced my shell on Linux with it, so I have the same terminal experience across all OSes
What are some alternatives?
Flask - The Python micro framework for building web applications.
fish-shell - The user-friendly command line shell.
node - Node.js JavaScript runtime ✨🐢🚀✨
elvish - Powerful scripting language & Versatile interactive shell
go - The Go programming language
starship - ☄🌌️ The minimal, blazing-fast, and infinitely customizable prompt for any shell!
CPython - The Python programming language
PowerShell - PowerShell for every system!
Laravel - Laravel is a web application framework with expressive, elegant syntax. We’ve already laid the foundation for your next big idea — freeing you to create without sweating the small things.
alacritty - A cross-platform, OpenGL terminal emulator.
mdbootstrap - React 18 & Bootstrap 5 & Material Design 2.0 UI KIT
xonsh - :shell: Python-powered, cross-platform, Unix-gazing shell.