Repository navigation
argument passing #13
Description
I'm not sure if this is the direction you'd want to go with this project, but this sentence caught my attention:
Also since it's written in Go it's very simple to curl the binary on to any existing system.
That basically means, I could spin up a brand new ubuntu server on AWS, curl and run this right?
I think this could be more than a provisioning tool with argument passing. You could do something like:
stack scripts/release.go <version>
You get all the benefits of a modern language with the power of bash.
Again possibly out of scope, but it got me thinking :-D
Activity
tj commentedon Aug 22, 2014
yeah I was thinking about making it a more generic shell-like language, I have mixed feelings on that since it's already (and will probably be more so) geared towards provisioning. I want to add variable support so that
{foo}if not defined will prompt if it's missing or require that you pass--foo bar. Otherwise yup just curl it and runmatthewmueller commentedon Aug 22, 2014
<3
{foo}prompting if no input, that'd be awesome.tj commentedon Aug 23, 2014
I want to change up the DSL (or lack of) quite a bit actually haha, might warrant doing a little interpreted language, stack will just be ship with that lang included and a bit of a runtime so it has the nice logging etc
matthewmueller commentedon Aug 23, 2014
digging the
Dockerfilestyle commands, but what do you have in mind?tj commentedon Aug 23, 2014
yea I like that too, I guess it's really just fancier
set -eat the moment, which itself is pretty sweet for provisioning haha, sucks that the rest of shell scripting is so horrid. I just figure if I'm going to be adding non-shell directives for other things I might as well just make a new language I suppose.I mostly just don't want to use Ruby or Python haha too much of a clusterfuck, shell is close but not expressive enough. Shell is pretty fucked though not sure I want to go down the road of supporting "native" shell commands with redirection and all that junk haha
matthewmueller commentedon Aug 23, 2014
Shell has awful composition too. you can't include a function and use it later, so it's really annoying breaking up your files.
tj commentedon Aug 23, 2014
yeah I have to say pretty much the only thing I like about shell scripts is that commands are first-class haha that's about it,
foo(){}is a pretty nice syntax too but referencing args via positional vars is lame