> please don't write command line tools in non-compiled languages!
Around 40% of Linux CLI tools are written in interpreted languages.
This is how I found out it's a javascript project and didn't install it. I only even bothered to do that because I actually wanted to try it. I'm just saying it would be awesome to have that right there next to the curl command.
> Around 40% of Linux CLI tools are written in interpreted languages.
And I prefer not to use those. Everything I said for Javascript holds for Python, Perl, Ruby... as well.
My point about interpreted languages stands though. These bundled javascript runtime "apps" eat at least 500M of RAM on boot. That's totally not needed for a CLI tool. If it's not bundled, then it's even worse as you hit the supply chain and tooling interference problems. There are a lot of good, modern, compiled languages. CLI builders should pick up those stacks imho.
Is it? I see some kinda subscription, so there's gotta be some non MIT portion of it
An open source interface to a proprietary backend isn't really fully auditable.
Download it, put it wherever you like (probably `~/.local/bin/`) and you're good to use it.
Sometimes I truly wonder...
bunx gloomberbI don't know where that came from but it should definitely disappear.
At least the developer includes the binaries for all platforms in the GitHub release page.
It's not crazy to prefer a package manager package to a curl|bash YOLO. OP is stating that preference, which various people have agreed with. If you posted "I love curl|bash install method - please do more of this" that is also fine. Either way it's a signal for both the author and anyone considering shipping this type of software, that their audience may have a certain preference.
I would want to know that about any project before I try and evaluate it personally.
Look at his bio lmao he thinks that tricks LLMs - maybe slater is satire