Well first, thanks to the author for a great look into how maybe the most user-facing feature in the most user-friendly language has changed.
It strikes me that there is a dual/parallel in the history & variety of CLI arguments/invocations (ls -la , rm --force &c). I wonder if anyone has written about that. I’m searching… (EDIT this SO answer is pretty good, Dan Luu has written something, clig deserves a mention)
The funny thing is that early drafts of this article had an observation about the CLI arguments/options (especially considering Ruby have grew from the “scripting languages” culture, it should’ve affected the design thinking on language creation).
But with the article already being as long as it is (and, considering the lack of reactions, probably pretty overstuffed with material and not well-paced), that observation had fallen through the cracks. The parallel seems pretty interesting topic to investigate, though!
I just want to say that I’ve thoroughly enjoyed all of your posts and I’m excited to see another series coming out!
Thank you!
Well first, thanks to the author for a great look into how maybe the most user-facing feature in the most user-friendly language has changed.
It strikes me that there is a dual/parallel in the history & variety of CLI arguments/invocations (
ls -la,rm --force&c). I wonder if anyone has written about that. I’m searching… (EDIT this SO answer is pretty good, Dan Luu has written something, clig deserves a mention)The funny thing is that early drafts of this article had an observation about the CLI arguments/options (especially considering Ruby have grew from the “scripting languages” culture, it should’ve affected the design thinking on language creation).
But with the article already being as long as it is (and, considering the lack of reactions, probably pretty overstuffed with material and not well-paced), that observation had fallen through the cracks. The parallel seems pretty interesting topic to investigate, though!