I feel like this with Python these days.
Just don’t call it with . Because that’s POSIX shell, not bash.
but effectively it’s bash, I think /bin/sh is a symlink to bash on every system I know of…
Edit: I feel corrected, thanks for the information, all the systems I used, had a symlink to bash. Also it was not intended to recommend using bash functionality when having a shebang !. As someone other pointed out, recommendation would be , or ! if you know that you’re not using bash specific functionality.
i thought most unix-like systems had it symlinked to a shell like dash. it’s what i have on my system (void linux), of course not as an interactive shell lol
i use for posix scripts and for bash scripts. works for posix scripts since even if it’s symlinked to bash, bash still supports posix features.
No no no no no, do not believe this you will shoot yourself in the foot.
Beginning with DebianSqueeze, Debian uses Dash as the target of the /bin/sh symlink. Dash lacks many of the features one would expect in an interactive shell, making it faster and more memory efficient than Bash.
From DebianSqueeze to DebianBullseye, it was possible to select bash as the target of the /bin/sh symlink (by running dpkg-reconfigure dash). As of DebianBookworm, this is no longer supported.
Still don’t do this. If you use bash specific syntax with this head, that’s a bashism and causes issues with people using zsh for example. Or with Debian/*buntu, who use dash as init shell.
Just use or if you’re funny.
/bin/bash won’t work on every system
for example NixOS
some other systems may have bash in /usr/bin or elsewhere
doesn’t work on NixOS since bash is in the nix store somewhere, resolves the correct location regardless of where bash is
Before nginx was a thing, I worked with a guy who forked apache httpd and wrote this blog in C, like, literally embedded html and css inside the server, so when he made a tpyo or was adding another post he had to recompile the source code. The performance was out of this world.
Nothing good old cache can’t solve. Compile JS and CSS. Bundle CSS with main HTML file and send it in batches since HTTP2 supports chunkifying your output. HTTP prefers one big stream over multiple smaller anyway. So that guy was only inviting trouble for himself.
You’re telling me about compiling JS, to my story that is so old… I had to check. and yes, JS existed back then. HTTP2? Wasn’t even planned. This was still when IRC communities weren’t sure if LAMP is Perl or PHP because both were equally popular ;)
There are a lot of solutions like that in rust. You basically compile the template into your code.
yeah, templates can be parsed at compile time but these frameworks are not embeeding whole fucking prerendered static pages/assets
Does a file lookup really take that long? Id say the trick was to have just plain old html with no bloat and you’re golden.
The answer is no. The more file is used the longer it sits in kernel filesystem cache. Getting file from cache versus having it in process memory is few function calls away all of which takes few microseconds. Which is negligible in comparison to network latency and other small issues that might be present in the code.
On few of our services we decided to store client configuration in JSON files on purpose instead of running with some sort of database storage. Accessing config is insanely fast and kernel makes sure that file is cached so when reading the file you always get fast and latest version. That service is currently handling around 100k requests a day, but we’ve had peaks in past that went up to almost a million requests a day.
Besides when it comes to human interaction and web sites you only need to get first contentful paint within one second. Anything above 1.5s will feel sluggish, but below 1s, it feels instant. That gives you on average around 800ms to send data back. Plenty of time unless you have a dependency nightmare and parse everything all the time.
Blog content was stored in memory and it was served with zero-copy to the socket, so yea, it’s way faster. It was before times of php-fpm and opcache that we’re using now. Back then things were deployed and communicated using tcp sockets (tcp to rails, django or php) or reading from a disk, when the best HDDs were 5600rpm, but rare to find on shared hosting.
Couldn’t the html be loaded into memory at the beginning of the program and then served whenever? I understand the reading from disk will be slow, but that only happens once in the beginning.
This reminds me of one of my older projects. I wanted to learn more about network communications, so I started working on a simple P2P chat app. It wasn’t anything fancy, but I really enjoyed working on it. One challenge I faced was that, at the time, I didn’t know how to listen for user input while handling network communication simultaneously. So, after I had managed to get multiple TCP sockets working on one thread, I thought, why not open another socket for HTTP communication? That way, I could incorporate a fancy web UI instead of just a CLI interface.
So, I wrote a simple HTTP server, which, in hindsight, might not have been necessary.
I’m currently trying to relearn all my advanced bash in python.
Just for fun or do you have a specific thing you feel would be better in python?
Certain things I want to do will be easier in python and will be more portable. But bash is my home.
i already learned how to use my operating system, now you’re telling me I have to learn 30 new libraries that do the exact same shit?
What if, get this, we put the bash scripts in yaml. And then put it in kubernetes.
Have you considered embedding python in those bash scripts? I have done this, and it is glorious.
Did you know you can zip entire Python project into single file and make it executable? Quite a neat feature. Shove all dependencies, modules and assets in there and voila. Single file python application.
