we do a little shell scripting

@coolbean i wish the shell was actually good .

@coolbean like bourne messed it up so badly . LITERALLY a couple adjustments and it wouldve been PEAK but no we have to deal with an annoyingly obscure dsl instead

@fiore thoughts on rc?

@coolbean rc is peakware but im not gonna run it because i want my scripts to be sh(1) compatible

@fiore but consider: why

@coolbean portability , since rc(1) is super obscure and mostly unavailable on basically all distros

@fiore es is in a slightly better position and derived from it

@coolbean still , obscureware that i dont wanna depend on

like , even fish is too "obscure" for my taste

@fiore i just dont get why

its your system. if you really need to you can package the shell yourself. sure its nice if others can copy things from your dotfiles easily but realistically i just dont think thats a common thing

@coolbean i just like to reduce the dependencies i have on stuff , yknow

like . the shell is ok . its fine . its not pretty , but . its functional . i can live w it

@coolbean also remember : i LOVE complaining about shit

@fiore oh i mightve just not been escaping the % and # correctly. i have to put a singlequote before those to escape them

@fiore friggin ^ to concatenate ' to escape and then the character. this is stupid

@fiore anyway now the syntax error is on the last } line. fascinating

@coolbean whack-a-mole

@fiore this would be so much easier of they just gave me a fucking switch statement oh my fucking god

@coolbean rc(1) - a shell doesnt have that ???????? downgrade moment ??

@fiore theres a github discussion about adding a switch statement and noones really opposed to it since itd simplify things when enumerating a variable but this isnt even what im doing im evaluating 2 variables to make for ultimately 3 cases

@coolbean imean its crazy tho , i think when pike made rc , the bourne shell already had case statements ?

@fiore rc removed a lot of things. the goal was simplifying things to improve composeability