1. 16
  1.  

  2. 6

    For more detail on xonsh and a great interview (if I do say so myself :) with Anthony, check out our podcast episode on it:

    http://podcastinit.com/anthony-scopatz-xonsh.html

    1. 5

      This is very intriguing. I think I’d prefer having strong, static typing of “shell” commands, but even just having a less godawful language environment than the Unix shell for manipulating pipelines and stringly typed Unix data seems like a big win.

      1. 3

        being able to use Python (and all the python libs) directly in the shell is a game changer. If you’ve used ipython, you probably wished to use it as a shell. I’ve switched from zsh to xonsh and am very impressed by how easily I can configure everything.

        1. 3

          don’t forget to refresh the landing page for bonus conflicting pronunciations

          1. 1

            This seems like such a bad idea on the surface, but having seen the examples, I am intrigued. Hmm… xonsh is to bash as hylang is to lisp! Python rules the world? :)

            1. [Comment removed by author]

              1. 2

                Oh, not really bad – just in the sense of, “wow, it’s a python + shell mash-up, that must have some weird edge cases”. I thought the same thing about hylang when I first saw it, and then it all sort of grew on me. It’s fun to play with language mash-ups like this!