sh VS Python Fire

I usually replace shell scripts with python (using sh module: https://amoffat.github.io/sh/ for calling other scripts/programs).

> sh relies on various Unix system calls and only works on Unix-like operating systems - Linux, macOS, BSDs etc. Specifically, Windows is not supported.

from: https://amoffat.github.io/sh/

You can even run interpreted languages as a shell. See plumbum or sh for ways to make it a more comfortable shell and ipython for a better version of the shell.

100% agree. There are some libraries like https://amoffat.github.io/sh/ that aim to make that easier, but they always have some quirks that, funnily enough, are often the corner cases you were hitting in your complicated Bash script in the first place.

Another way to make Python scripts nicer is to use https://github.com/amoffat/sh

pdbpp: Improved pdb boltons: assorted python addtions twisted: event driven networking framework sorcery: Dark magic in python, things know where+how they are being called, helps reducing boilerplate sh: Better alternative for subprocess module, much more pythonic taskipy: npm run scipt_name like functionality snoop: pdb lite, record+replay function steps birdseye: graphical debugger remote-pdb: easy pdb from inside containers typer: wrapper around click for simpler code for CLIs arrow: Always TZ aware datetimes, plus more features more-itertools: more functions for iterators pydantic: data validation + dataclasses loguru: better logging notifiers: sending notifications from python

Sh sh and outside python, watch watch

The cli tool [fire](https://github.com/google/python-fire/blob/master/docs/guide...) has a nifty feature where it can generate a cli for any file for you.

So random and math are somewhat usable that way

    $ python -m fire random uniform 0 1

With python-fire you can use either function or class to create your subcommands. But I find working with classes more intuitive and manageable. Our first command is going to be a sub-command that shows us the UTC time.

Have you checked out fire? Personally, I think it's a really elegant solution to turning a callable object into command line. Plus, the chaining function calls feature lets you build some pretty complex command line patterns likes you never seen with other frameworks. Definitely worth giving it a try!

I started with click but found python fire to be so much easier to use.

I highly recommend checking out fire for adding a CLI quickly to little utility scripts that aren't going to be published to the world but just for you.

python fire autogenerates CLI wrappers for python modules, which really synergizes with method-chaining APIs like pandas.

Fire can basically do the first step (object -> CLI):

https://github.com/google/python-fire

Gooey can do (CLI -> GUI):

https://github.com/chriskiehl/Gooey

also, while we're on the subject, fire may not be the same kind of workhorse as argparse or click, but for really simple stuff it's pretty awesome

I'm relatively new to Go (coming from Python) so I haven't been using Cobra (or Go, for that matter) for long but it's clearly very polished -- only friction I was experiencing with it is there's a lot of boilerplate to creating commands and subcommands, that IMO (idea as proven by python-fire) can be naturally (better) expressed as types / fields / methods that are already built into the language.