> Would there be any merit to breaking the shell apart into a number of > smaller programs? Looking at GNU bash as an example (though I know GNU > is probably one of the worst places to look for "Unix style"), It is my > understanding that one program handles many things, such as keyboard > bindings (which I believe in turn requires bash to read in cbreak or raw > or whatever and do it's own line editing), glob expansion, aliases, > history, syntax parsing, command execution, job control, etc. etc. > > IMO this results in a more complex program than necessary. Keyboard > bindings for example; why couldn't they be handled by a program that > just does keyboard bindings + line editing, and writes finalized lines > to the shell. This in turn could also allow bindings to be more easily > customized (such as binding autocomplete to Ctrl+F instead of tab) > depending on its implementation.
fwiw, plan 9 handles key bindings in #κ. the shell hasn't a clue. rio (or acme) handles the editing. again, the shell hasn't a clue. and autocomplete? yup. same story. hapless rc hasn't a clue. rc is proof that ignorance is bliss. - erik
