autosetup VS the xonsh shell

You might love autosetup, a Tcl-based autoconf tool chain replacement. Not just Tcl-based, but designed to work with a simple Tcl subset shell called Jim, which compiles from one source code file. So you can bootstrap your project in a mostly-platform-independent with a standard C compiler as the only prerequisite. https://msteveb.github.io/autosetup/. - Source: Hacker News / about 2 years ago

Friends, I'm not saying that tools like zx are not good. I do like to write some scripts using js/ts. I believe pythoners prefer https://xon.sh/ . Perl is also attractive and interesting. Fish is friendly. However, I still believe that posix-shell has its own advantages. The balance among size, code length, and expressiveness. I think the only possible competitors are tcl and perl, maybe lua. - Source: Hacker News / 3 months ago

Sorry for the hijack, but I've been using xonsh[1] since 2018. It's a shell with Python syntax. If you dislike Bash scripting, and know Python, please consider this! [1] https://xon.sh/. - Source: Hacker News / 5 months ago

Those of you who use (or used) this as your shell: care to share your experience? It seems a lot less full-featured than https://xon.sh/, but maybe you don't need a lot of bells and whistles for regular usage. I mostly run build, execute, and install commands. I'm somewhat enticed at the possibility of being able to wrap common executables into forms that are typed (like nushell or elvish) and manipulate them in a... - Source: Hacker News / 5 months ago

In that case, is it even more similar to xonsh? https://xon.sh/. - Source: Hacker News / 6 months ago

Not to hijack, but also consider xonsh[1]. It's Python based, and all your scripts can be Python (or hybrid-Python). I've been using it for both Windows and Linux for over 5 years. [1] https://xon.sh/. - Source: Hacker News / 8 months ago