Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:57 PM, YpN wrote: > > I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. You need to write > your pages / posts in HTML or markdown (the project supports smu) and then > the script will "create" your website. I know we have werc but I wanted to > write my own tools. > Actually it's a bit hard to describe what it does, without examples. > If you're interested, you can view the project at github[1] > I use a bunch of shellscripts to generate a static site which I just tidied up a bit and published on github. It's written in (POSIX) shellscript and is located at: https://github.com/hiltjo/static-site-scripts . I hope someone finds it useful.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
Paul Onyschuk dixit: >With mdocml [1] you get nice HTML output for free, because it Actually, no output at all, since it’s not a full *roff processor, and I (have to) use a compatibility leader (between AT&T nroff, GNU groff with UCB macros, and GNU groff with GNU macros) which also implements less portable macros like .Mx in my manpages. >On other hand you need stick to the mdoc/man and avoid low level >roff. This doesn’t work at all, e.g. the HYPHEN-MINUS is mangled in GNU output, leading to broken copy/paste behaviour. bye, //mirabilos -- 13:37⎜«Natureshadow» Deep inside, I hate mirabilos. I mean, he's a good guy. But he's always right! In every fsckin' situation, he's right. Even with his deeply perverted taste in software and borked ambition towards broken OSes - in the end, he's damn right about it :(! […] works in mksh
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Sat, 14 Dec 2013 01:17:02 + (UTC) Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Though I do low-level *roff stuff too. I had to learn it because > I had to fix the mdoc macro _implementation_ itself… not too hard, > the classical documentation https://www.mirbsd.org/manUSD/21.troff > and https://www.mirbsd.org/manUSD/22.trofftut are nice intros. > > Not always, there’s stuff that needs multilines in *roff, but > with structural regexes that will work. > > Also, HTML output can be done (cf. the above links; those were > done by AT&T nroff (from 4.4BSD-Alpha, hacked up) → col → some > mksh script with lots of sed to convert them. Valid XHTML/1.1, > or it’s a bug. Much nicer than GNU groff. No way to natively > specify hyperlinks or other HTML features (due to this using > the preformatted manpages that are generated during the BSD > build anyway), and fixed-width output, but I chose to make it > a feature and CSSify this to look like amber TTY output. With mdocml [1] you get nice HTML output for free, because it translates high level macros like mdoc/man to output format directly. This produces output typically of better quality than when fiddling with roff or catpages directly (preformatted man pages). On other hand you need stick to the mdoc/man and avoid low level roff. This works just fine for the most documentation that is out there... excluding mksh. As for writing man pages, there is very good tutorial/manual written by the author of mdocml [2]. [1] http://mdocml.bsd.lv/ [2] http://manpages.bsd.lv/mdoc.html -- Paul Onyschuk
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
Chris Down dixit: >If masking files with directories is considered "clean", then I don't >want to live on this planet any more. >Just don't do it. Agreed. I don’t put *.htm files into subdirectories at all; the other MirWebseite setup does it as it’s got some more hierarchically structured content besides the main page. Actually, using “directories” is bad since it relies on the index.* files being called correctly, *and* because people are too stupid to append the extra slash at the end, leading to extra redirects (or error pages). Paul Onyschuk dixit: >concatenation and line breaking is too terse: two spaces at the end of >line - I don't consider that a good choice. Anything using whitespace as significant sucks. Anything using whitespace at end of line/file as significant is even worse, an abomination, and ought to be shot before birth, period. (And I so regularily remove whitespace at EOL left there by some vim user from my files that I made me an editor macro to do that.) >It is very easy to hit corner cases with Markdown. Example: code block That’s also one. This thing “looks easy” at first glance but is frustrating to someone used to something much better. >Few words on roff. I you stick to man, mdoc and ms macros and avoid ACK on mdoc, *definite* NAK on man, and no opinion on ms (since I do most “paper-ish” stuff in mdoc). >low-level roff stuff, it is quite nice format. On the first look it is Though I do low-level *roff stuff too. I had to learn it because I had to fix the mdoc macro _implementation_ itself… not too hard, the classical documentation https://www.mirbsd.org/manUSD/21.troff and https://www.mirbsd.org/manUSD/22.trofftut are nice intros. >quite alien, but it originated on Unix and that shows off. Sed, >awk, grep and other standard tools work great with sane roff >document: you can stick to the oneliners (I don't think that this can >be said about any other document format). Not always, there’s stuff that needs multilines in *roff, but with structural regexes that will work. Also, HTML output can be done (cf. the above links; those were done by AT&T nroff (from 4.4BSD-Alpha, hacked up) → col → some mksh script with lots of sed to convert them. Valid XHTML/1.1, or it’s a bug. Much nicer than GNU groff. No way to natively specify hyperlinks or other HTML features (due to this using the preformatted manpages that are generated during the BSD build anyway), and fixed-width output, but I chose to make it a feature and CSSify this to look like amber TTY output. bye, //mirabilos -- 13:37⎜«Natureshadow» Deep inside, I hate mirabilos. I mean, he's a good guy. But he's always right! In every fsckin' situation, he's right. Even with his deeply perverted taste in software and borked ambition towards broken OSes - in the end, he's damn right about it :(! […] works in mksh
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 13/12/2013, Nick wrote: > On a related note, for those who like him, Eben Moglen just did an > excellent series of talks It's not the FSF's doctrine that loses; it's GNU's shitty code. > Browsing the web nowadays feels like having engineers > and advertisers constantly shouting "fuck you" at me. This. I just tell them to take a number.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 14 December 2013 00:16, Charlie Kester wrote: > RSS is dead? Did I miss the obituary? What, if anything, has replaced > it? In all honesty twitter / facebook announcement links. If that doesn't happen I expect to be able to sign up to some announce list, so that I get notified when a blogger I like updates his/her site. And then there is Hacker News ... *shudder* And to lesser extent Google Alerts which feels broken lately. Kind regards,
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
> RSS is dead? Did I miss the obituary? What, if anything, has replaced > it? Facebook. Because totalitarianism never felt so cozy... > I still use it to track new posts on the blogs and other pages I'm > interested in. I guess I'm old-fashioned, huh? I still use the > commandline too, and I store all of my data on my local machine... Tut tut tut... You must be a criminal of some sort. Off to the gulag with you! On a related note, for those who like him, Eben Moglen just did an excellent series of talks: http://snowdenandthefuture.info/ Part III in particular talks about the "ecological" threats posed by the practises of companies like facebook - they're pretty obvious, but he does a nice job of putting them in a broader context. To be frank I have no idea why people flock to it. Ignorance, I presume. Browsing the web nowadays feels like having engineers and advertisers constantly shouting "fuck you" at me.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu 12 Dec 2013 at 20:00:46 PST Kai Hendry wrote: RSS is dead. why bother? RSS is dead? Did I miss the obituary? What, if anything, has replaced it? I still use it to track new posts on the blogs and other pages I'm interested in. I guess I'm old-fashioned, huh? I still use the commandline too, and I store all of my data on my local machine...
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 02:12:48PM +0100, Paul Onyschuk wrote: > Plain text is even more human friendly. Email composition is based on > conventions, not syntax - quotes, references etc. For many thing it > is good enough. For conversations yes. However those 'mini "markup"' languages allow for at least somethat decent conversion to html andsother formats, whichs is quite usefull. I think they take quite good middle ground. No to detailed and rigorious as to be nasty for people (even non technical) to write in. But still with some rules/conventions to allow machines do some rudimentary parsing and rendering/conversion. > Few words on roff. I you stick to man, mdoc and ms macros and avoid > low-level roff stuff, it is quite nice format. On the first look it is > quite alien, but it originated on Unix and that shows off. Sed, > awk, grep and other standard tools work great with sane roff > document: you can stick to the oneliners (I don't think that this can > be said about any other document format). Well I do not have much experience with them, but even looking at source of suckless tools man pages they are less pleasant to look at than for example Markdown, though admittedly not too scary ether and one can decipher stuff. Still Markdown reads more comforatably since it has some "plain" formatting in plain text.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 13/12/2013, Paul Onyschuk wrote: > [Markdown] is still non-strict, I missed this. Where is evaluation order specified? > Sed, awk, grep and other standard tools work great with sane roff > document: you can stick to the oneliners (I don't think that this can > be said about any other document format). Yes, and that these tools lose on non-line-based formats is their fault, not the format's. See http://doc.cat-v.org/bell_labs/structural_regexps/
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:57:56 +0200 Edgaras wrote: > I get why some people might not like markdown, or similar. Fix me if > I'm wrong, but I think that Markdown and similar are also made to be > human readable without any parser. And I'd dare to say that nether > html not TeX or *roff are as human readable as Margdown and similar. > Though of course previously mentioned issues are nothing to sneeze > at, still I would consider this as major point in prefering something > like Markdown. (also I guess that some issues, namely non-strictness, > comes precisely from this goal, as people can write stuff in many > ways) Plain text is even more human friendly. Email composition is based on conventions, not syntax - quotes, references etc. For many thing it is good enough. Few words on roff. I you stick to man, mdoc and ms macros and avoid low-level roff stuff, it is quite nice format. On the first look it is quite alien, but it originated on Unix and that shows off. Sed, awk, grep and other standard tools work great with sane roff document: you can stick to the oneliners (I don't think that this can be said about any other document format). -- Paul Onyschuk
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
I get why some people might not like markdown, or similar. Fix me if I'm wrong, but I think that Markdown and similar are also made to be human readable without any parser. And I'd dare to say that nether html not TeX or *roff are as human readable as Margdown and similar. Though of course previously mentioned issues are nothing to sneeze at, still I would consider this as major point in prefering something like Markdown. (also I guess that some issues, namely non-strictness, comes precisely from this goal, as people can write stuff in many ways)
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 01:53:09 + Nick wrote: > > Quoth Thorsten Glaser: > > I absolutely d̲e̲t̲e̲s̲t̲ Markdown. > > Really? Why? I quite like it (at least smu's subset). Works for the > simple usecases I need it, and keeps the angle brackets of doom away > from me. > Markdown solves only one shortcoming of HTML (shared by all markups/formats from Addams Family): verbosity. It is still non-strict, which is main source of pain for me, not sure about Thorsten. Splitting in paragraphs is pretty much implicit, moreover empty line is also used to end blocks of other kinds. Switching between line concatenation and line breaking is too terse: two spaces at the end of line - I don't consider that a good choice. It is very easy to hit corner cases with Markdown. Example: code block inside bullet list. Some flavours of Markdown have fenced code blocks, sometimes with different syntax, some don't have that sugar at all. So there is no universal solution. This is another issue with Markdown, which is a supposedly interchangeable format. It isn't, thanks to implicit nature and non-strict syntax, it is almost guaranteed that every implementation will behave a bit differently (add flavouring on top of that). There are solutions for some of this issues. When formating something with Markdown becomes tricky, invite Uncle Fester back (HTML). Still mixing HTML and Markdown defeats somehow whole purpose of using lightweight markups. This comes from experience I had few years ago: converting more than 100 pages of old documentation in custom markup (similar to Plain Old Documentation) to Markdown. In the middle of process I wanted to hurt someone badly: one additional or one missing empty line that breaks half of document (welcome back MS Word?). It is easy to write own custom Markdown parser, but throwing the same document at e.g. Github is a major advantage you probably don't want to lose. Still I'm more than fine with using Markdown for simple thing like generating list of links and so on. -- Paul Onyschuk
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
Just for completeness: I’ve written MirWebseite as a non-generic thing to generate static XHTML websites, too, and even got a second only slightly related installation (which, ofc, by now deviates quite a bit from the installation on the MirBSD/mksh website). Though, it needs the “CMS” user to provide valid XHTML/1.1 fragments; I absolutely d̲e̲t̲e̲s̲t̲ Markdown. Yeah, we talked about that. I do not use Markdown, I also write my posts in HTML. I was thinking to create a generic syntax, but I finally gave up because it would require to much work. smu is supported for the guys who prefer Markdown over plain HTML. Anyway, I decided to create wswsh when I was looking rofftohtm source code. So we have three exemplary “things” (I refuse to call my stuff a “framework”) in at least four installations, which people interested can have peeks at. That's true. Framework was pretentious but I was unable to find a good name for the script. So, let's call it a simple script. :) 2014 is the year of C :) I hope it'll be the first year when I'll write my own C programs ;) This sucks Why mksh? Can't you use POSIX shell? I use mksh on my boxes, problem? setting up prefix in the Makefile sucks Yeah, I could change that. Same for interp directory. RSS is dead. why bother? My readers like RSS. And RSS isn't dead. Even hg provides an Atom for the commits. If you don't like my script, don't use it. I never came here to share the new web "revolution". I just wanted to share it because people might be interested. It's perfect for my needs, I do not want to prove you it's suckless or not... Regards From Y.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
> > Did you really just say that every file should just be abstracted as a
> > directory... how much of that web 2.0 Kool-Aid did you drink?
>
> Is there an easier way to encourage clean URLs?
>
> Without resorting to crazy rewrites?
'Options +Multiviews' in .htaccess works a charm. Making a directory
for every page is not what timbl meant when he recommended URLs that
don't expose the technology they're using (which could change).
> Why bother? The troves of people who cried at Google Reader shutting
> down would say otherwise. RSS is "dying" because companies like
> Google, Facebook, Twitter want to *own* the flow of information, and
> they can't do that when the world uses open plumbing. This is BS.
Well said, Andrew, thanks.
I still don't really understand what people are doing that requires
~200 lines of shell. I haven't looked at the OP's code, but for
completeness I'm attaching the Makefile I use for a website, which I
happen to like.
Nick
src = \
index.md \
software/index.md \
otherplaces.md
tgt = $(src:.md=.html)
lnk = $(tgt:.html=)
gz = $(tgt:.html=.html.gz)
all: $(tgt) $(gz)
.md.html:
echo "Making $@"
echo "" > $@
sed 's/^#* //;1q' < $< >> $@
echo "" >> $@
echo '' >> $@
smu < $< >> $@
echo "Last updated: " >> $@
stat -c %y $< | awk '{print $$1}' >> $@
echo "" >> $@
ln -sf $@ $*
# not POSIX
%.gz: %
echo "Compressing $<"
gzip < $< > $@
clean:
rm -f $(tgt) $(lnk) $(gz)
.PHONY: all clean
.SUFFIXES: .md .html .gz
.SILENT:
Options +Multiviews
AddEncoding x-gzip .gz
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 2013-12-13 14:31:51 +0800, Patrick wrote: > Maybe give him the benefit of the doubt that he meant something like > 'maintains hierarchical taxonomy'. /2013/12/01/foo.html or /2013/12/01/foo/ -- I certainly don't care, but specifically trying to get the latter over the former is just insanity. pgpY30zyen9Bk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 2013-12-13 14:25, Chris Down wrote: > > Is there an easier way to encourage clean URLs? > If masking files with directories is considered "clean", then I don't > want to live on this planet any more. Maybe give him the benefit of the doubt that he meant something like 'maintains hierarchical taxonomy'. Kai probably didn't mean 'taxa with file suffices are bad', just as he probably didn't mean 'racially pure' or 'std free'. ;)
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 2013-12-13 14:23:25 +0800, Kai Hendry wrote: > On 13 December 2013 14:20, Chris Down wrote: > > Did you really just say that every file should just be abstracted as a > > directory... how much of that web 2.0 Kool-Aid did you drink? > > Is there an easier way to encourage clean URLs? If masking files with directories is considered "clean", then I don't want to live on this planet any more. > Without resorting to crazy rewrites? Just don't do it. pgpyURARrQ87Q.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 13 December 2013 14:20, Chris Down wrote: > Did you really just say that every file should just be abstracted as a > directory... how much of that web 2.0 Kool-Aid did you drink? Is there an easier way to encourage clean URLs? Without resorting to crazy rewrites?
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 2013-12-13 14:09:25 +0800, Kai Hendry wrote: > you want foo.html to be exposed by your httpd as /foo/ ? No. > Only generate one index.html per directory. Simples. Did you really just say that every file should just be abstracted as a directory... how much of that web 2.0 Kool-Aid did you drink? pgpIZUJKlLmpi.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 13 December 2013 14:01, Chris Down wrote: >> You generate .html URLs. bit 90s and fugly. urls should be clean >> /2013/blogpost/ > Huh? That's the job of the web server. how? you want foo.html to be exposed by your httpd as /foo/ ? Only generate one index.html per directory. Simples.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Kai Hendry wrote: > RSS is dead. why bother? Why bother? The troves of people who cried at Google Reader shutting down would say otherwise. RSS is "dying" because companies like Google, Facebook, Twitter want to *own* the flow of information, and they can't do that when the world uses open plumbing. This is BS. I certainly want an open Internet, one where a filter bubble doesn't exist. Right now, the plumbing we have for this is RSS and Atom. To a lesser degree, I guess XMPP (see the efforts of the early autonomo.us (http://wiki.autonomo.us/Main_Page) movement) -- http://apgwoz.com
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
Oh Kai :-) On 2013-12-13 12:00:46 +0800, Kai Hendry wrote: > This sucks > > Why mksh? Can't you use POSIX shell? Enjoy your lack of useful functionality for no reason. At least mksh is reasonable (disclaimer: I have not looked at the code). > config files suck https://twitter.com/rob_pike/status/360557625756229632 "Just work" is myopic, in many situations it assumes that all users have the same end goals. Sane default configuration == good. Not being able to configure things == stupid (and yes, I consider config.h to be a "configuration file"). > RSS is dead. why bother? What on earth have you been smoking to say that RSS is dead? :-) > You generate .html URLs. bit 90s and fugly. urls should be clean > /2013/blogpost/ Huh? That's the job of the web server. > Feel free to mock my web framework: https://github.com/kaihendry/wordsister I'll refrain from saying something about PHP... :-) By the way, in that readme, you don't need to escape each expansion. Just quote the heredoc delimiter (ie. "<< 'EOF'"). pgpjSqRVD64a4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Kai Hendry wrote: > You generate .html URLs. bit 90s and fugly. urls should be clean > /2013/blogpost/ Not the job of the static website generator.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
This sucks Why mksh? Can't you use POSIX shell? .wshtml is used in your README. Actually only TXT works by default. smu is on my path, why interp? config files suck https://twitter.com/rob_pike/status/360557625756229632 setting up prefix in the Makefile sucks RSS is dead. why bother? You generate .html URLs. bit 90s and fugly. urls should be clean /2013/blogpost/ Feel free to mock my web framework: https://github.com/kaihendry/wordsister besos,
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
Quoth Thorsten Glaser: > I absolutely d̲e̲t̲e̲s̲t̲ Markdown. Really? Why? I quite like it (at least smu's subset). Works for the simple usecases I need it, and keeps the angle brackets of doom away from me.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
YpN dixit: >I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. You need to write Just for completeness: I’ve written MirWebseite as a non-generic thing to generate static XHTML websites, too, and even got a second only slightly related installation (which, ofc, by now deviates quite a bit from the installation on the MirBSD/mksh website). Though, it needs the “CMS” user to provide valid XHTML/1.1 fragments; I absolutely d̲e̲t̲e̲s̲t̲ Markdown. And Natureshadow has written “SARAH” which is something similar, too. Turns out shell is not half bad at this kind of stuff ;-) So we have three exemplary “things” (I refuse to call my stuff a “framework”) in at least four installations, which people interested can have peeks at. bye, //mirabilos, wondering why t f anyone would want to do this in C which is obviously not TRT for string ops -- „Cool, /usr/share/doc/mksh/examples/uhr.gz ist ja ein Grund, mksh auf jedem System zu installieren.“ -- XTaran auf der OpenRheinRuhr, ganz begeistert (EN: “[…]uhr.gz is a reason to install mksh on every system.”)
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 12/12/2013, Troels Henriksen wrote: > No, that was year 100. 2014 is the year of MMXIV. Anyhow, this is actually the year 44.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Ryan O’Hara wrote: > Jekyll seems pretty decent to me. What is there to object to? Markdown and > Ruby? > > The rest of the things you mention don’t have much to do with offline > website generation. They’re just languages that compile to other > languages. Jade, especially, is the absolute opposite of a “static > content” language. Jekyll is pretty decent at what it does, I just feel that it is far too overly complex for what it does and is akin to a 10-in-1 fisher price toy. Comparing to this project it seems Jekyll has a couple "advantages" like variables in templates (sed), development tools (start a webserver), build utils (create a Makefile). This is bloat to me. I feel like "web 2.0" developers don't understand the basics and rely on these magic all-in-one tools too much. I don't see how the rest of my list doesn't apply. Browsers can't interpret them so you must generate to something they can offline. On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Bryan Bennett wrote: > So you're saying that this is better than Coffeescript? That > comparison is completely unintelligible.If you're saying that we > should step back and return to a simpler approach to web > design/development - I completely agree, but how does a static site > generator compare to Coffeescript/LESS/Jade at all? You could very > well extend this to work with all of those technologies. I didn't say that Coffeescript/LESS/Jade directly relate to this project, that was my bit of ranting tacked on :o) These layers come and go so quickly while HTML/Javascript/CSS continue to exist. I'm sure in the month from now we'll see another CSS generator and another Javascript code generator. That is the trend I'm sick of seeing. I know Javascript and CSS very well. I don't need some stupid layer on top of that. If I need to recall some standard methods in my code, I'll use snippets in vim for that.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
So you're saying that this is better than Coffeescript? That comparison is completely unintelligible.If you're saying that we should step back and return to a simpler approach to web design/development - I completely agree, but how does a static site generator compare to Coffeescript/LESS/Jade at all? You could very well extend this to work with all of those technologies.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Nicholas Hall wrote: > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Ryan O’Hara wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Nicholas Hall wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:57 AM, YpN wrote: I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. >>> >>> This looks pretty cool. I'm sick of all the shitty hip offline >>> website generators, and the direction web development is headed in >>> general -- layer upon layer upon layer. Seriously, these guys wrap >>> one shitty language on top of another shitty language. They should >>> leave these tools up to their editors if they feel the need to use >>> them, not standardize another abstraction layer. >>> >> >> I don’t understand how each of your sentences matches up with the rest. >> What are you talking about? > > I'm talking about Jekyll, SASS, Coffeescript, LESS, Compass, Jade. I > could go on. > Jekyll seems pretty decent to me. What is there to object to? Markdown and Ruby? The rest of the things you mention don’t have much to do with offline website generation. They’re just languages that compile to other languages. Jade, especially, is the absolute opposite of a “static content” language.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Ryan O’Hara wrote: > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Nicholas Hall wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:57 AM, YpN wrote: >>> I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. >> >> This looks pretty cool. I'm sick of all the shitty hip offline >> website generators, and the direction web development is headed in >> general -- layer upon layer upon layer. Seriously, these guys wrap >> one shitty language on top of another shitty language. They should >> leave these tools up to their editors if they feel the need to use >> them, not standardize another abstraction layer. >> > > I don’t understand how each of your sentences matches up with the rest. > What are you talking about? I'm talking about Jekyll, SASS, Coffeescript, LESS, Compass, Jade. I could go on.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Nicholas Hall wrote: > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:57 AM, YpN wrote: >> I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. > > This looks pretty cool. I'm sick of all the shitty hip offline > website generators, and the direction web development is headed in > general -- layer upon layer upon layer. Seriously, these guys wrap > one shitty language on top of another shitty language. They should > leave these tools up to their editors if they feel the need to use > them, not standardize another abstraction layer. > I don’t understand how each of your sentences matches up with the rest. What are you talking about?
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:57 AM, YpN wrote: > I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. This looks pretty cool. I'm sick of all the shitty hip offline website generators, and the direction web development is headed in general -- layer upon layer upon layer. Seriously, these guys wrap one shitty language on top of another shitty language. They should leave these tools up to their editors if they feel the need to use them, not standardize another abstraction layer.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
sin writes: > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 05:11:06PM +0100, YpN wrote: >> > C is generally more and efficient, I suppose. >> > >> > On 12/12/2013 16:04, sin wrote: >> > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:42:52PM +, Neo Romantique wrote: >> > >> Why Shell, and not C? >> > >> Otherwise tool looks interesting. >> > > I don't see why this has to be done in C. >> >> Actually, I don't know C but I plan to learn it in 2014. >> I might consider porting it to C, for my first practise. I wrote it in mksh >> because this is a wonderful shell and it's really powerful. And it's how I >> learn new shell hacks (creating my stuff) :) > > 2014 is the year of C :) No, that was year 100. 2014 is the year of MMXIV. -- \ Troels /\ Henriksen
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 12/12/2013 16:22, sin wrote: On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:20:32PM +, Neo Romantique wrote: I've meant to write "Generally more readable and efficient", but then after having a second thought I've deleted the readable part, but had some leftover. :) Don't top post. Readable code depends mostly on the programmer. Have you ever written APL code? bye, sin No, I have not. I suppose C-like syntax is easier for me because I've started with Pascal/JS. It's subjective, that is why I've removed it on the second thought. -- Regards, neo~ http://www.inventati.org/neoromance
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:20:32PM +, Neo Romantique wrote: > I've meant to write "Generally more readable and efficient", but > then after having a second thought I've deleted the readable part, > but had some leftover. :) Don't top post. Readable code depends mostly on the programmer. Have you ever written APL code? bye, sin
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
I've meant to write "Generally more readable and efficient", but then after having a second thought I've deleted the readable part, but had some leftover. :) On 12/12/2013 16:18, sin wrote: On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:13:56AM -0500, Strake wrote: On 12/12/2013, Neo Romantique wrote: C is generally more and efficient, I suppose. I assume you mean "more efficient". I think he meant "generally more and efficient" lol -- Regards, neo~ http://www.inventati.org/neoromance
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:13:56AM -0500, Strake wrote: > On 12/12/2013, Neo Romantique wrote: > > C is generally more and efficient, I suppose. > > I assume you mean "more efficient". I think he meant "generally more and efficient" lol
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On 12/12/2013, Neo Romantique wrote: > C is generally more and efficient, I suppose. I assume you mean "more efficient". It may be more for the machine but it's less for the programmer. We build machines to do tedious work so we needn't.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 05:11:06PM +0100, YpN wrote: > > C is generally more and efficient, I suppose. > > > > On 12/12/2013 16:04, sin wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:42:52PM +, Neo Romantique wrote: > > >> Why Shell, and not C? > > >> Otherwise tool looks interesting. > > > I don't see why this has to be done in C. > > Actually, I don't know C but I plan to learn it in 2014. > I might consider porting it to C, for my first practise. I wrote it in mksh > because this is a wonderful shell and it's really powerful. And it's how I > learn new shell hacks (creating my stuff) :) 2014 is the year of C :)
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
> C is generally more and efficient, I suppose. > > On 12/12/2013 16:04, sin wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:42:52PM +, Neo Romantique wrote: > >> Why Shell, and not C? > >> Otherwise tool looks interesting. > > I don't see why this has to be done in C. > > > > -- > Regards, > neo~ > http://www.inventati.org/neoromance Actually, I don't know C but I plan to learn it in 2014. I might consider porting it to C, for my first practise. I wrote it in mksh because this is a wonderful shell and it's really powerful. And it's how I learn new shell hacks (creating my stuff) :) From Y.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:05:22PM +, Neo Romantique wrote: > C is generally more and efficient, I suppose. Nonsense. You are just generating text.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 05:51:44PM +0200, Dimitris Zervas wrote: > That's EXACTLY what I want to do for my blog! I've started the project > but right now it's a piece of crap. > However I use C. I don't even use any markdown library, I am making my > own (I'm not yet sure if that's right or wrong...). Please don't top post, makes it difficult for others to parse the e-mails and to respond properly. bye, sin
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
C is generally more and efficient, I suppose. On 12/12/2013 16:04, sin wrote: On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:42:52PM +, Neo Romantique wrote: Why Shell, and not C? Otherwise tool looks interesting. I don't see why this has to be done in C. -- Regards, neo~ http://www.inventati.org/neoromance
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:42:52PM +, Neo Romantique wrote: > Why Shell, and not C? > Otherwise tool looks interesting. I don't see why this has to be done in C.
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
That's EXACTLY what I want to do for my blog! I've started the project but right now it's a piece of crap. However I use C. I don't even use any markdown library, I am making my own (I'm not yet sure if that's right or wrong...). On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Neo Romantique wrote: > Why Shell, and not C? > Otherwise tool looks interesting. > > > On 12/12/2013 14:57, YpN wrote: >> >> Hey dudes, >> >> I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. You need to >> write >> your pages / posts in HTML or markdown (the project supports smu) and then >> the script will "create" your website. I know we have werc but I wanted to >> write my own tools. >> Actually it's a bit hard to describe what it does, without examples. >> If you're interested, you can view the project at github[1] >> >> Sincerely >> >> [1] https://github.com/Ypnose/Wswsh >> >> From Y. >> > > -- > Regards, > neo~ > http://www.inventati.org/neoromance > >
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
I think he was aiming for something like werc. Good job! On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Neo Romantique wrote: > Why Shell, and not C? > Otherwise tool looks interesting. > > > On 12/12/2013 14:57, YpN wrote: >> >> Hey dudes, >> >> I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. You need to >> write >> your pages / posts in HTML or markdown (the project supports smu) and then >> the script will "create" your website. I know we have werc but I wanted to >> write my own tools. >> Actually it's a bit hard to describe what it does, without examples. >> If you're interested, you can view the project at github[1] >> >> Sincerely >> >> [1] https://github.com/Ypnose/Wswsh >> >> From Y. >> > > -- > Regards, > neo~ > http://www.inventati.org/neoromance > >
Re: [dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
Why Shell, and not C? Otherwise tool looks interesting. On 12/12/2013 14:57, YpN wrote: Hey dudes, I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. You need to write your pages / posts in HTML or markdown (the project supports smu) and then the script will "create" your website. I know we have werc but I wanted to write my own tools. Actually it's a bit hard to describe what it does, without examples. If you're interested, you can view the project at github[1] Sincerely [1] https://github.com/Ypnose/Wswsh From Y. -- Regards, neo~ http://www.inventati.org/neoromance
[dev] wswsh: a mksh web framework
Hey dudes, I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. You need to write your pages / posts in HTML or markdown (the project supports smu) and then the script will "create" your website. I know we have werc but I wanted to write my own tools. Actually it's a bit hard to describe what it does, without examples. If you're interested, you can view the project at github[1] Sincerely [1] https://github.com/Ypnose/Wswsh From Y.
