From: Sebastian Hungerecker <sepp2k@...>
Date: 2007-08-29T18:15:41+09:00
Subject: Re: ruby shell?

Chad Perrin wrote:
> Okay, now that I've thought about it, maybe irb isn't ideal -- if only
> because stuff like executing ls would require something like the
> following:
>
> � > puts `ls`
>
> . . . or:
>
> � > system 'ls'
>
> That could get annoying after a while.

That could be worked around quite easily with method_missing. Then you'd only
need system or `` to invoke programs that are named the same as ruby methods.
What I'd consider more of a problem is tab-completion. It would be possible to
make irb's tab-completion complete program names too by simply defining a
method for every executable in the PATH, but I don't see a way to make it
complete filenames or other kind of parameters to the programs (especially
since those'd have to be quoted).


-- 
NP: Green Carnation - My Dark Reflections of Life and Death
Jabber: sepp2k@jabber.org
ICQ: 205544826