Scalaz VS Ammonite-Ops

If I managed to gain you interest you can take a look at one of the following libraries like cats, scalaz for scala and vavr for java which contain type class definitions and implementations for common types.

I’ve specifically had 2 job offers internally at my company because of this language. First with Cats and Scalaz and now with ZIO, Scala has taken the best parts of Haskell, the best parts of Scala, and made it really nice to work with. You can barely see the OOP leftovers.

Scripting API is quite limited, so the third option. - reuse the ammonite scripts https://github.com/com-lihaoyi/Ammonite or look how this is implemented (using internal compiler API),

Your exposure to Functional Programming with Haskell and Clojure suggest you will certainly pick up Scala quickly. With ZIO and cats, you can write robust software quickly. Consider the excellent Coursera Scala course. Get "the Red Book" https://www.manning.com/books/functional-programming-in-scala, and most important, play. Experiment to see how things work. Get https://ammonite.io/

Here's an example of a smaller project that added telemetry without suffering a fork:

https://github.com/com-lihaoyi/Ammonite/issues/607

Or ammonite - I've ran Gatling performance test from a simple script based on this gist it fetches all the dependencies, compiles and runs the test, producing nice html report..

Scala with the Typelevel ecosystem. Stay on the jVM, but have a much more pleasant and robust experience, including a great REPL.

If you are installing, and you are learning, I would also recommend ammonite as an easier REPL.

I've been using amm on and off https://ammonite.io/#Ammonite-Shell

pretty nice if you know scala, still have to use regular shell(s) so I do not forget them

I've never tested Ammonite, only read the https://ammonite.io/#Ammonite-Shell, so I'm only guessing here.

From what I understand, Ammonite was designed as a "readline shell" as I wrote in the article. It perpetuates this approach that everything is a command.

The thesis of my article suggests we do the opposite: I'm suggesting to rethink shells by starting from the interface (here the SLY REPL) and then implement the shell features.

In particular, it seems that Ammonite does not support back-references and I'm not sure it has an interactive inspector.

While Ammonite seems to be a definite improvement over the _syntax_ of Bash, etc., I'm not sure it brings much novelty in terms of user interface. But again, I know very little about it so I may have missed some features :)

I wonder what people think about Ammonite (https://ammonite.io/)?

It's not Lisp but Scala so may not be the authors language of choice however it can be used as a Shell: https://ammonite.io/#Ammonite-Shell

I am personally using it and compared to a classical shell like Bash it's really nice for more structured data related tasks (exploring some API, checking some data, creating a bunch of PRs at once, ...).

It also makes use of Scala's adjustable syntax and functional concepts so you basically get shell piping but in a strongly typed fashion (e.g.