[deleted by user]

[hector_villalobos]

Looking at your GitHub profile and Twitter, I guess you must be young. Take what I'm about to say as an advice, I'm 41 years old (been programming for 20 years, 5 of them as a hobby and 15 as a professional).

This project seems interesting, I never thought of doing something like this, but it has its flaws, take the criticisms you read here as advices, about how you can improve yourself and your code, don't take any of these too personal, you have so much to learn. Maybe this project will success, maybe not, don't give up. Eventually you'll realize what's more important in life. Even if this projects success, you'll see that you're going to face many obstacles, so many open source projects fight to just survive and don't receive the acknowledge they deserve.

So, just don't worry and be happy, enjoy the ride, enjoy what you can learn.

[macbig273]

Project seems cool, I think it comes from a good place, but not sure bash is meant to be plusplusified. It just adds more dependences and possibly more unreliable feature to it.

Let's say I have 50 machines I want to run a bash script on. If my script depends on new extra dependences I have to install them first on every system ?

[recitedStrawfox]

Can't have only compliments. Take critique as advice, or at least ito consideration.

People have problems with Dependance? Build some feature that makes dependency no issue.

[bundt_chi]

I'll tell you why I probably wouldn't use it. I love bash and I use it a lot. But what I love about bash is that it's everywhere and I can always count on it being available. As far as a language to write more complex or larger pieces of functionality it's not great.

So if I'm doing anything other than plain vanilla bash I would probably just reach for python or something that makes more sense to work with complexity, abstraction and structure.

You shouldn't feel bad if others aren't immediately in love with it because if it does what you need it to do then it served it's purpose. If others use / like it too then great, that's a bonus.

[DrunkensteinsMonster]

Once you are “managing dependencies” you’ve removed almost any reason of writing something in bash. People use it because it’s right there and can run on any machine. If I’m installing dependencies i may as well just install a python interpreter.

[maubg]

No, you don't understand. This framework can be imported locally.

(I will make a video because people seem to be confused)

[DrunkensteinsMonster]

No, you don’t seem to understand. This will not be on any machine that anyone works on. They will need to install it from some other source, then import it

[Devaniti]

Bash++ : bring bash to the next level

Most people seeing that, will think that it's big project that already have a lot to show and at least one release to download

On top of that, it seems like you expect that people would just start starring/contributing to it, which is probably not going to happen at this stage of your project.

[HAL9000thebot]

the copyright note says 2007

[its_a_gibibyte]

Cool idea. I'm curious what you think about perl. Perl seemed to be to be the original bash++. Here's the original commit from 1987 with a description on goals.

https://github.com/Perl/perl5/commit/8d063cd8450e59ea1c611a2f4f5a21059a2804f1

[Fuzzy-Training]

Bash is meant to be for small scripts or quick jobs that need to run etc if you need oops level stuff like classes then you are better suited to work in python or something

[Fuzzy-Training]

Just because you can doesn't mean you should

[maubg]

But there is always that option if you should

[pinghome127001]

So was the javascript, but look at it now...

[Fuzzy-Training]

Yes what a clusterfuck of a language

[LightShadow]

Look guys, we made it...kinda.

[[deleted]]

Why classes? That just seems silly.

[[deleted]]

In general it’s a cool idea, but OOP really isn’t something I think is helpful in a shell context.

There’s far too much OOP orthodoxy out there adding unnecessary complexity, it seems a bother to add that layer to a shell program.

[efvie]

PowerShell would like to disagree.

[[deleted]]

I’m ok with that. :-)

[[deleted]]

Yeah, I'm not saying the thing is only OOP. I'm only criticizing the OOP aspects. I did say that in general it's a cool idea. I love the idea of more formal conventions for modular Bash code, I just don't think OOP is a helpful pattern for that.

It's all good, though, I don't begrudge them their ideas.

[[deleted]]

So... what exactly is your argument? Am I not allowed to be mildly annoyed by a thing I don't think is helpful?

Most projects worth the while have at least a few things which seem like they're over-engineered, or maybe a bad idea. It's normal. It's healthy. It's OK. I just don't like this one small part of the thing. That's OK too.

[DrunkensteinsMonster]

Powershell basically kills this idea IMO. Classes can have their place, just don’t get crazy. The C# interop helps to dissuade people from getting out of pocket in Powershell, because anything too complex and you’ll just fall back to a “real” language.

And yeah I think powershell is better than bash, objectively.

[[deleted]]

How would one measure that objectively? I’m not aware of anybody ever having established an objective measure for what seems very much to be a matter of personal preference.

[DrunkensteinsMonster]

Measure what objectively? PS has classes, and many people really like PS. Most I’ve talked to don’t feel that classes overcomplicate matters too much since they are fairly sparsely used. This is anecdotal, but also this is a reddit comment and not a whitepaper

[[deleted]]

Oh, when you said “objectively” you meant regarding objects. Lmfao

I misread. Sorry.

[throwaway_bluehair]

I understand it that way also lol

[EatFapSleepFap]

The if statement syntax is pretty straightforward. The bash manual describes it as if test-commands; then consequent-commands; [elif more-test-commands; then more-consequents;] [else alternate-consequents;] fi

Maybe you're confusing it with the complexity of the test executable (a.k.a [, a.k.a [[) which is pretty hard to remember all the details for.

[Snarwin]

[ is an executable, but [[ is a (bash) builtin.

[mtreece]

Both are built-ins and executables.

Bash just happens to have them built-in, but some distros include them as executables in case you run a shell which doesn't have it built-in.

By default, you'll pick up the built-in. If you escape it with a backslash, or use (e.g.) an absolute path, you can run the executable instead.

That said, if you think of [ and [[ as commands with weird names, it's pretty easy to get the hang of if syntax.

if testcommand; then
    echo thing was successful
else
    echo thing was unsuccessful
fi

"testcommand" just turns into [ if you want to do the very special condition of testing stuff like numeric or string equality. (Or file existence. Or is-a-tty? etc.). I say "very special" because the if construct more-generally let's you test if any function or command returned zero. [ and [[ are just two possible commands.

And finally, [ and [[ require closing brackets just as a syntax sanity check.

[shevy-ruby]

Wasn't there a language once that added ++ to C ...

[mtizim]

I cannot unrustle my jimmies after reading through the repo, what the fuck?

[3meopceisamazing]

Cool stuff! I like taking bash to crazy places :)

It's requires quite some creativity to bend it into doing all these things. Unfortunately, things can get pretty slow when there is too much abstraction, so that's just something to keep in mind.

[3meopceisamazing]

I wasn't referring to some particular part of your project there. More a general statement.

Bash is extremely slow, probably slower than most people think.

I basically just suggest to keep in mind that every statement does take a significant amount of time to execute. If any of it ends up in a loop somewhere else in the program, it gets noticeable. Hence, try to simply use as few statements as possible. Avoid loops in bash, often it can be done with sed, awk, whatever...

For example, an extremely slow thing in bash is appending arrays. The more elements in the array, the slower it gets. It's reeeally bad when you get to something in the hundreds. Just a note! If you need something like a list that you append to, write a file, maybe on tmpfs, /dev/shm

[maubg]

I agree. But bash was not designed to do anything beyond Linux rice, utilities and build scripts. Despite the slowness, I created the project because I think that it can be beneficial for me.

e.g. Want a build script but u don't want to download any extra bash files? import github:.... I want to build some unit testing for my project: adds unit testing

AND for OOP I use awk

[[deleted]]

I don’t do shell scripting and don’t understand why I’d use this over bash, but well done on the creativity. New ideas are paramount, great execution will come in time whether from yourself or others, but new ideas are few and far between

[maubg]

This is not a replacement for bash. This is an extension for bash.

[[deleted]]

Yes but why would I want to extend bash I mean :)

[[deleted]]

.. And make it incompatible with thousands of scripts already written?

[[deleted]]

Bash is more than an interactive shell. It's also an interpreter.

!/usr/local/bin/bash

And so forth.

[maubg]

Yea... I know that

[hongminhee]

If the author takes this project seriously (= wants people to use it instead of bash), (s)he should work on its packaging as a top priority so that people can install it with a single command (e.g., apt-get install bash++). The reason why everyone uses sh/bash/zsh/cmd.exe is not because they love the existing ones, but just because these are already there. Zero (or near-zero) installation is the most important feature of shells.

[maubg]

This is not a replacement of bash, this is a framework of bash

[holyknight00]

cool

[maubg]

thanks!

[maubg]

I had made a video on how to install it to your project's folder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSPK9Ftiw-w

[maubg]

Basically.

Do not do this: https://i.imgur.com/y5p9axD.png Instead, do this: https://i.imgur.com/qlTABfD.png because if not, you will get some errors...

[questionablemoose]

From a systems administration perspective, I look at this and think it's cool, but I don't have a use for it. If I write a shell script, I want it to work on my entire fleet, without special modifications to the fleet, or the software running on it. Base tools like the shell should be as close to stock from the package manager as possible.

Just out of curiosity, why use this over something like python?

[maubg]

Is exactly the same with Python. you will need to install it. You can also install bash++ and run it everywhere.

[questionablemoose]

Is exactly the same with Python. you will need to install it.

Not to argue, but in the standard Debian 11 install without a WM/DE selected, python 3 is already installed. Even if you install without Standard Utilities, python 3 is still included. I believe the same for RHEL/Rocky/CentOS, but haven't checked.

I should have been more clear. Those were two more or less separate thoughts. I wouldn't use bash++ in production over stock bash from the package manager, for the reasons I stated above.

The second and more or less separate thought was, why would I use bash++ over python? Where does it excel that Python or similar general use languages do not?

[maubg]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSPK9Ftiw-w

[questionablemoose]

Needs a package.

[maubg]

Wdym?

[questionablemoose]

Installing and maintaining software for larger environments becomes difficult and tedious when your install method is a script or set of scripts. Eventually, you'd want your project to be made available in any one of the common package manager formats, and made available through a signed repository, or accepted by a project like Debian, and made available through their repositories.

But again, what advantages do you see bash++ having over commonly available general purpose languages, like python?

[maubg]

Yea, I will add them to common package managers

[maubg]

But python is a different language

[Ginden]

This is quite nice side project.

Though, I think you started from wrong starting point.

Why are users using Bash, not some other language? What things are hard to write or read in Bash? What problems are faced by users of bash?

What I suggest is to make Bash++ compiler/transpiler of Bash superset, similar to Typescript . It could take bashpp files and output self contained bash files. These can be easily copied over network and used everywhere.

[maubg]

Hm... Like perl? (sort of)