|
|
|
|
|
by makecheck
2879 days ago
|
|
Since it is impossible to force all inputs to be well-constructed, text acts as the more predictable interface. Once I learn a bunch of command-line tools for processing text, I know exactly how to compose commands or post-process text from a file or extend the usefulness of a program that doesn’t happen to produce output I want. While there may be something “brittle” from time to time, in my experience this just means it was possible to tackle the problem with text when the alternative would have been to have no way to do it at all. PowerShell feels like it wants everything to be structured perfectly, and “perfect is the enemy of the good” applies. Sometimes, I don’t care if there is a way to perfectly structure a particular input because many use cases just don’t have stringent requirements. |
|
Disagree. If the program decides to change its output formatting even by a small amount (like going from a GNU version of the program to the BSD version, where such things can happen), e.g. changing the column order of two items, whoops, your script is broken. When you deal with object versus textual output the textual representation of a program can change all day long and you're not affected. The only breaking change is a change to the output object format (like renaming or deleting properties).
Writing scripts that rely on text being output in a specific order with a specific format is very brittle in my opinion.