From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: erik quanstrom Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 21:39:06 -0400 To: 9fans@9fans.net Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20120828201430.0C490B827@mail.bitblocks.com> References: <68ce90976b22bdb0929ccccafef4b7d0@kw.quanstro.net> <3330200.XJjoRb8JbZ@blitz> <5538fcd345a73fc294c6ee568f2fcdb4@kw.quanstro.net> <20120828201430.0C490B827@mail.bitblocks.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] rc's shortcomings (new subject line) Topicbox-Message-UUID: b2f7233e-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > The feature I want is the ability to pass not just character > values in environment or pipes but arbitrary Scheme objects. > But that requires changes at the OS level (or mapping them > to/from strings, which is a waste if both sides can handle > structured objects). !? the ability to pass typed records around is an idea that was tarred, feathered, drawn and quartered by unix. files, and therefore streams, have no type. they are byte streams. one of the advantages of unix over, say, ibm systems, is that in unix it is not the os' business to care what you're passing about. but by the same token, if you are the application, you get to arrange these things by yourself. rc already passes structured data through the environment. rc variables in the environment are defined as var: [^ctl-a]* | ([^ctl-a]*) ctl-a list so there is precident for this in shells. - erik