Path: csiph.com!xmission!news.snarked.org!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!panix!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail
From: Vaidas BoQsc <vaidas.boqsc@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: gnu.bash.bug
Subject: Re: Are there any plans for more readable, modern syntaxes for If statements?
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 19:05:58 +0200
Lines: 31
Approved: bug-bash@gnu.org
Message-ID: <mailman.477.1585242401.3020.bug-bash@gnu.org>
References: <CAB+qc9AAPQbzp92tv-FOR4Kh+2UdZyRwGiPOfNegVqv5UFnU5Q@mail.gmail.com> <C46D87FD-947F-46CA-A03C-68E52E14BF5A@larryv.me> <CAB+qc9DGHtSxD_2cYkDnhzXYR-_C6civArEsfiwfECbWzCxigw@mail.gmail.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lists.gnu.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: bug-bash@gnu.org
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_Vel=C3=A1zquez?= <vq@larryv.me>
Envelope-to: bug-bash@gnu.org
In-Reply-To: <C46D87FD-947F-46CA-A03C-68E52E14BF5A@larryv.me>
Precedence: list
Xref: csiph.com gnu.bash.bug:16045

I keep on wondering why these shells can't come up with something better
than improving previous shell syntax by little by only providing poor
better alternatives.
I somehow think there is a need to rethink shells from scratch to make them
less mentally demanding and readable in the command prompt and scripts
themselves.
I really haven't seen anything that I would like to use so far. Neither
zsh, tcsh or any other of the more popular ones as far as I remember from
the last weeks "personal research".

2020-03-20, pn, 06:11 Lawrence Vel=C3=A1zquez <vq@larryv.me> ra=C5=A1=C4=97=
:

> > On Mar 12, 2020, at 3:00 PM, Vaidas BoQsc <vaidas.boqsc@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Are there any plans to have alternative, a more modern C or D like
> > syntaxes for IF statements, While loop and the like in Bash?
> >
> > Would it be better to just make a new shell and command language
> > similar to Bash instead of adding these alternatives?
>
> FWIW, some of zsh's complex commands have alternative forms that
> are visually more C-like, although they have some caveats and are
> (obviously) not even remotely portable.
>
>
> http://zsh.sourceforge.net/Doc/Release/Shell-Grammar.html#Alternate-Forms=
-For-Complex-Commands
>
> vq