> We still use the shell, but it's no longer the universal composition system it was meant to be.
Huh? When did that change?
Dagger seems interesting, but this opinion that the shell and standard Unix tools are archaic is a dubious starting principle.
Every now and then a project with similar ideas comes along, and whether it rejects the notion of passing unstructured data between commands, addresses the footguns and frustrations of shell scripting, or is built with a more modern and "safe" programming language, it ultimately never seems to catch on as much as traditional Unix shells and tooling has.
The reality is that these tools and the design choices made 50 years ago are timeless in nature. They're deliberately lacking in features and don't attach themselves to any specific tech du jour. It's this primitive nature and the "do one thing well" philosophy that makes them infinitely composable. The same pipelines Unix nerds were building 50 years ago to solve problems are still useful today, which is remarkable when you consider how quickly technology moves.
Sure, new tools are invented all the time, and they might do things better than old ones. I use `eza` instead of `ls`; `fd` instead of `find` (mostly); `rg` instead of `grep` (mostly); `fzf` is a pretty essential addition to my workflow, and so on. But the underlying principles of these tools are still the same as the tools they're replacing. They're just slightly modernized and ergonomic versions of them.
Whether or not we need a `container` command, `from alpine`, or an entire new shell for that, is a separate topic. It could be argued that this could be accomplished with a few functions or standalone commands. Even if we do need this new tooling, that's great, but don't tell me that it's meant to replace a proven set of tools and workflows[1]. When containers stop being popular, will we still need this?
Also, "Daggerverse" and "modules"? Great, let's bring in the npm mentality to the shell, just what I needed.
[1]: Ah, they don't, it's meant to serve as a complement. Alright, fair enough. I'm lowering my pitchfork.
Huh? When did that change?
Dagger seems interesting, but this opinion that the shell and standard Unix tools are archaic is a dubious starting principle.
Every now and then a project with similar ideas comes along, and whether it rejects the notion of passing unstructured data between commands, addresses the footguns and frustrations of shell scripting, or is built with a more modern and "safe" programming language, it ultimately never seems to catch on as much as traditional Unix shells and tooling has.
The reality is that these tools and the design choices made 50 years ago are timeless in nature. They're deliberately lacking in features and don't attach themselves to any specific tech du jour. It's this primitive nature and the "do one thing well" philosophy that makes them infinitely composable. The same pipelines Unix nerds were building 50 years ago to solve problems are still useful today, which is remarkable when you consider how quickly technology moves.
Sure, new tools are invented all the time, and they might do things better than old ones. I use `eza` instead of `ls`; `fd` instead of `find` (mostly); `rg` instead of `grep` (mostly); `fzf` is a pretty essential addition to my workflow, and so on. But the underlying principles of these tools are still the same as the tools they're replacing. They're just slightly modernized and ergonomic versions of them.
Whether or not we need a `container` command, `from alpine`, or an entire new shell for that, is a separate topic. It could be argued that this could be accomplished with a few functions or standalone commands. Even if we do need this new tooling, that's great, but don't tell me that it's meant to replace a proven set of tools and workflows[1]. When containers stop being popular, will we still need this?
Also, "Daggerverse" and "modules"? Great, let's bring in the npm mentality to the shell, just what I needed.
[1]: Ah, they don't, it's meant to serve as a complement. Alright, fair enough. I'm lowering my pitchfork.