English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > News

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 23 September 2018, 01:56   #261
idrougge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 3,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olaf Barthel View Post
This extends to the shell and its commands, which differ from the arguably more robust Unix design in many important points. For example, there is no well-defined shell language, the commands perform the wildcard expansion (...)
That is actually an improvement over the Unix way. Ever tried to run "unzip *.zip" in a Unix shell?
idrougge is offline  
Old 23 September 2018, 08:41   #262
Samurai_Crow
Total Chaos forever!

Samurai_Crow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ft. Collins, CO USA
Age: 45
Posts: 1,336
Send a message via Yahoo to Samurai_Crow
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDBUG View Post
Would it be possible to simply make a "new" shell and leave the old for compatibility ?
:-D
The Flow Editor under AmigaVision would have been a great replacement for shell and AREXX both if the rights hadn't been lost.
Samurai_Crow is offline  
Old 23 September 2018, 09:34   #263
Sim085
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 618
What about ZShell? I discovered this when I installed BetterWB and has tab auto-completion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDBUG View Post
Would it be possible to simply make a "new" shell and leave the old for compatibility ?
:-D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Romanujan View Post
there are gossips that Shell-Seg from 3.1.4 got tab autocompletion

Last edited by Sim085; 23 September 2018 at 10:48.
Sim085 is offline  
Old 23 September 2018, 11:44   #264
Samurai_Crow
Total Chaos forever!

Samurai_Crow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ft. Collins, CO USA
Age: 45
Posts: 1,336
Send a message via Yahoo to Samurai_Crow
ZShell is written in Assembly and doesn't follow AmigaDOS syntax. Aush is more compatible but still needs work and is closed source shareware so I don't know what language it's written in.
Samurai_Crow is offline  
Old 23 September 2018, 12:13   #265
modrobert
old bearded fool

modrobert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bangkok
Age: 52
Posts: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by idrougge View Post
That is actually an improvement over the Unix way. Ever tried to run "unzip *.zip" in a Unix shell?
unzip '*.zip'
modrobert is offline  
Old 23 September 2018, 12:23   #266
Olaf Barthel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Lehrte, Germany
Posts: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDBUG View Post
Would it be possible to simply make a "new" shell and leave the old for compatibility ?
:-D
Sure, it has been done before.

Compatibility is the major issue, though. What the AmigaDOS shell does is not particularly complex. It's how the shell does what needs to be done that is more complex than it deserves, and there are side-effects of the implementation which will give you grief
Olaf Barthel is offline  
Old 23 September 2018, 19:16   #267
gulliver
BoingBagged

 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The South of nowhere
Age: 41
Posts: 2,049
Since someone else has been spreading some spoilers in another place, I can do the same here without consequences.

BTW, you dont need to worry about images using chipram. If available, by default they will use fastmem first.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Workbench_Prefs.jpg
Views:	386
Size:	74.8 KB
ID:	59945  
gulliver is offline  
Old 23 September 2018, 20:57   #268
Cammy
Registered User
Cammy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Age: 34
Posts: 1,138
I like the inclusion of MagicWB colours in the icon preferences. It would be even better if Workbench had a good standard, default 16 colour palette though...
Cammy is offline  
Old 23 September 2018, 22:19   #269
Daedalus
Registered User

Daedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 4,446
Ooh, it's like a lo-fi version of the 3.9 prefs Excellent that that functionality is coming back to 3.1 though!
Daedalus is offline  
Old 24 September 2018, 01:53   #270
kolla
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 1,899
Are the prefs file formats openly described? I still think it would be better if IPrefs could speak ARexx and perform prefs changes via ARexx instead of just monitoring env:, but if one at least could have a generic non-gui prefs editor, that would help too.
kolla is offline  
Old 24 September 2018, 02:03   #271
ExiE
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: T/C
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolla View Post
I still think it would be better if IPrefs could speak ARexx and perform prefs changes via ARexx
What a crazy idea.
XML based prefs format would be nice though.
ExiE is offline  
Old 24 September 2018, 02:11   #272
kolla
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 1,899
What is more tricky...?
- Making sure Ghostbuster hack keeps working with newer workbench.library.
- Making Ghostbuster hack redundant by implementing "visible if valid" already.
kolla is offline  
Old 24 September 2018, 02:25   #273
kolla
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 1,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExiE View Post
What a crazy idea.
XML based prefs format would be nice though.
I would prefer yaml myself, xml parsing is rather memory consuming (for every tag, keep reading till closing tag to be sure xml is valid, what if there is no closing tag, or you run out of ram before you reach it?)
kolla is offline  
Old 24 September 2018, 07:12   #274
Minuous
Coder/webmaster/gamer
Minuous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Canberra/Australia
Posts: 2,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolla View Post
Are the prefs file formats openly described?
Yes, they are IFF PREF files and, although strictly speaking they are considered private, structure definitions for the chunks are in the various system include files.

@eXie:

I think redoing everything as XML would be lots of work to end up with something less efficient than what we already have.
Minuous is offline  
Old 24 September 2018, 09:23   #275
haynor666
retro maniac

haynor666's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tarnobrzeg/Poland
Age: 41
Posts: 1,702
I was never user of 3.5 or 3.9 mainly because I use my amigas these days only for games. Interesting that some people are trying to improve old system even if we have more mature systems. Question is if it will work on ROM 3.0 (november 1992) and how much it will cost
haynor666 is offline  
Old 24 September 2018, 12:28   #276
kolla
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 1,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by haynor666 View Post
Question is if it will work on ROM 3.0 (november 1992) and how much it will cost
It has been said quite a few times now, that most OS 3.1.4 changes are actually in the kickstart itself - so, no, you are supposed to update the kickstart ROMs with 3.1.4 ones. Alternatively, you can of course softkick from 3.0, if your system has a way of doing that (many configurations struggle with soft-kicking.)
kolla is offline  
Old 24 September 2018, 12:58   #277
idrougge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 3,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExiE View Post
What a crazy idea.
XML based prefs format would be nice though.
Aren't most prefs formats IFF based? That makes making editor quite simple as long as the format is documented and guaranteed not to mutate.
idrougge is offline  
Old 24 September 2018, 15:09   #278
kolla
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 1,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olaf Barthel View Post
What we got here in AmigaDOS is architecturally so different from what happens in the Unix kernel and the various shells that improvements in how the AmigaDOS shell/console combo works are in order.
I never considered Amiga shell unix shell-like, it reminds me more of the CLIs of various networking equipment (CatOS etc) and with a hint of DCL/VMS like features (assigns for example).

Quote:
Incidentally, the command completion in the con-handler for OS4 was modeled on the WShell completion code
As in actual WShell code? Interesting - was Hawes involved? WShell code is available wile RexxMast code is not? Please tell more.

Quote:
which offers suffix, prefix and combined prefix+suffix completion. I would be loath to lose this functionality and replace it with what shells today (bash comes to mind) are restricted to (suffix completion only).
I don't know how familiar you are with various unix shells, and I am not sure what you mean with prefix and suffix in this context, but they (zsh for example) are typically fully programmable to complete to anything you might wish. (Completion in bash has largely been done as an afterthought. In general, using bash should be avoided, which of course explains why it is most used - just another example of Murphy's law applied to technology.)

Ideally I would love to see more VMS/DCL like features, with much stricter requirements to shell command binaries. For example, I would require them to have command line template (the ".key") defined, so that the shell can extract that without even running the binary, and offer them for completion. Entering a command and a "?" should immediately expand to help (like in Cisco iOS etc.) without needing enter first and running the command first.
kolla is offline  
Old 24 September 2018, 15:48   #279
Olaf Barthel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Lehrte, Germany
Posts: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolla View Post
I never considered Amiga shell unix shell-like, it reminds me more of the CLIs of various networking equipment (CatOS etc) and with a hint of DCL/VMS like features (assigns for example).
Over the years the AmigaDOS shell was enhanced with the features of the Unix shells in mind.

It's not as if the feature set became close, you just started to realize how much was lacking, especially in terms of consistency, and how weird some of the solutions were, e.g. rewriting the entire script file to perform variable substitution instead of rewriting the individual lines after they were read.

Quote:
As in actual WShell code? Interesting - was Hawes involved? WShell code is available wile RexxMast code is not? Please tell more.
No, this was just me replicating what WShell would do. I dearly missed how powerful the volume/assignment/directory/file completion was in WShell, so I re-created the functionality from scratch (WShell has great documentation, and many of the features it offers would be worth adopting).

Quote:
I don't know how familiar you are with various unix shells, and I am not sure what you mean with prefix and suffix in this context, but they (zsh for example) are typically fully programmable to complete to anything you might wish. (Completion in bash has largely been done as an afterthought. In general, using bash should be avoided, which of course explains why it is most used - just another example of Murphy's law applied to technology.)
My knowledge of Unix shells is not particularly deep. These are complex tools: you probably pick one either because it's the only one available, or you find that it best serves your needs, and then you stick with it. I have used csh (was the default for NetBSD/OpenBSD at a time), zsh (had file completion and interactive command-line history browsing when csh didn't) and bash (better documentation, file completion, editing, history browsing and configurability than the competition) over the years, but now I mostly stick with bash.

What I meant with prefix/suffix, etc. matching is (I hope) quickly explained.

Say, you want to complete the name of the file "diskdoctor.c".

You type "disk", then hit tab to cycle through the matches. The completion process will keep the prefix "disk" and show you all possible matches which begin with "disk", e.g. "diskdoctor.h", "diskdoctor.c", etc. This is the basic completion procedure you would expect to work.

You type "doctor.c", move the cursor to the "d", then hit tab to cycle through the matches. The completion process will keep the suffix "doctor.c" and show you all the matches which end with "doctor.c", e.g. "diskdoctor.c".

You type "d.c", move the cursor to the ".", then hit tab to cycle through the matches. The completion process will keep the prefix "d" and the suffix ".c" and show you all the matches, e.g. "diskdoctor.c".

The file name completion code in the OS4 shell can do all three of these tricks, as can WShell from which I got the idea.

Quote:
Ideally I would love to see more VMS/DCL like features, with much stricter requirements to shell command binaries. For example, I would require them to have command line template (the ".key") defined, so that the shell can extract that without even running the binary, and offer them for completion. Entering a command and a "?" should immediately expand to help (like in Cisco iOS etc.) without needing enter first and running the command first.
Sounds like you will need a different shell for that

The command templates were a good idea, shame that the remainder of the shell subsystem did not do just as good (or maybe it did, and AmigaDOS just got a very stripped-down version of it when the code was ported from Tripos).

The AmigaDOS shell design's strengths are few, and extensibility isn't even among its strengths. For example, it would be very convenient to be able to string together multiple commands per line, like you would for a Unix shell with ";" "&&" and "||", but there's no way to make this happen in a compatible manner.
Olaf Barthel is offline  
Old 24 September 2018, 19:08   #280
hexaae
Registered User

hexaae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Italy
Age: 44
Posts: 1,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olaf Barthel View Post
For example, it would be very convenient to be able to string together multiple commands per line, like you would for a Unix shell with ";" "&&" and "||", but there's no way to make this happen in a compatible manner.
One of most wanted feature missing in Amiga Shell unfortunately.
On the Amiga Shell you can only use "+" with Run to execute multiple commands in one go (RETURN at the end of each line):
run List +
echo Ciao! +
dir +
...

Last edited by hexaae; 24 September 2018 at 19:38.
hexaae is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Available now: AmigaOS 3.1.4 bubbob42 Amiga scene 979 27 December 2019 11:32
Would AmigaOS 3.9 be ok for me? stu232 support.Hardware 12 02 October 2013 19:20
AmigaOS 3.9 PoLoMoTo support.WinUAE 8 27 August 2011 19:06
AmigaOS 3.5 or 3.9 maddoc666 support.Apps 12 22 February 2010 09:02
AmigaOS XL sturme New to Emulation or Amiga scene 4 15 January 2002 03:13

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:21.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Page generated in 0.10382 seconds with 16 queries