That is an excellent point.

HF

----- Original Message -----
From: Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs / dmu.ac.uk>
To: ruby-talk ML <ruby-talk / netlab.co.jp>
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2000 8:48 AM
Subject: [ruby-talk:04352] Re: Thirty-seven Reasons [Hal Fulton] Love[s]Ruby


> On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, David Douthitt wrote:
>
> > REASON 29
> > 29.  It can be used interactively. Conceivably it could be used as a
> > sort of "Kornshell squared."
> >
> > Oh, really?  I don't know..... ksh can do a LOT.  And what about scsh
(Scheme Shell)?  Another language for me to learn :-)
>
> This one jarred me as well.  tclsh has the property that undefined
> commands are searched for on the user's PATH...
> brains hgs 161 %> tclsh
> % ls
> Enumeration.rb       index.html           take_two_procs.rb
> Enumeration_test.rb  indexblob.rb         take_two_procs2.rb
> attributes2.rb       nestedyields.rb      timed_read.rb
> display_diffs.rb     partial_nesting.rb   udpclient.rb
> docs_in_here_doc.rb  ruby-man-1.4         udpserver.rb
> gnudecode.rb         self_print.rb
> gnudecode2.rb        sort_lines.rb
> % exit
> brains hgs 162 %>
>
> but
>
> irb(main):002:0> ls
> NameError: undefined local variable or method `ls' for #<Object:0xea118>
> (irb):2:in `irb_binding'
>
> I don't think we would want this to work like a shell straight out of the
> box, but a "proper" ruby shell might be nice.
>
> Hugh
> hgs / dmu.ac.uk
>
>