Re: [COFF] Powershell better than Bourne shell?

Andrew Warkentin wrote in <CAD-qYGovNTQH-jF4A5bGkCiN55u1e7=8oEhwN=GatqTO+=AVeQ(a)mail.gmail.com>: |On 11/18/21, Adam Thornton <athornton(a)gmail.com> wrote: ... |The biggest issue I have with PowerShell besides its verbosity is that |commands have to be implemented as plugins rather than as external |programs. | |I'm thinking at some point I may write a Bourne-like shell with |object-oriented features for the OS that I'm working on. Instead of |requiring commands to be plugins to use the object-oriented features I |am thinking of having a generic facility for serialization and |deserialization with hooks to deal with the output format of different |commands (with JSON being an option as well). I think by the end of the 80s / beginning of 90s David Korn's shell did offer things like (object|module|x).subcall, aka method calls in C++ sense or in ruby sense also module functions iirc. I think there were even modules for graphical user interfaces that could be driven by Korn shell, but all that i only saw from glancing over history, i did not live it. Ruby was slow compared to Perl 19 years ago. I wrote "Monty" things for TCL, Python, Ruby, Perl, and object based "Monty" for the same except TCL. AMD Athlon 1600+, 133FSB, 256MB (27MB used;), linux console, 10000 loops: monty.php:# ~0.250 secs. monty.pl:# ~0.100 secs. monty.py:# ~0.590 secs. monty.rb:# ~0.178 secs. monty.tcl:# ~0.360 secs. monty_obj.php:# ~0.310 secs. monty_obj.pl:# ~0.175 secs. monty_obj.py:# ~0.600 secs. monty_obj.rb:# ~0.218 secs. Back in around 2011 someone counted script language startup CPU cycles, and iirc Python was several times that of Perl. --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt)