Post #2406400

2026-05-11 20:46 UTC

@Fiona@blahaj.zone Hmmm... maybe stddataout instead of stdoutj for the sake of not inherently coupling it to a specific format (since JSON is going to be so variable that you'd have to have a mutal understanding on both ends anyway, I'd think). That way if some weird inbred child of JSON and YAML ends up winning in the future, it's not stuck getting called by the name of its parent (for example). stddbg should 100% be a thing though, that's just common sense.

Replies (1)

@Fiona@blahaj.zone 2026-05-11 20:52

@rosaaeterna@transfem.social I should have elaborated more: It should absolutely be tied to a very specific format, so that everyone knows how to read and write it, but there should be more options, ideally even with the shell being able to translate between them: If one program outputs csv, and the other needs json, then the shell should do the conversion. (Obviously not all conversions are possible and there should be strict standards, but in general the idea would be to allow different formats and have the shell inform the other program of what formats it currently supports, based on what the shell itself can produce and based on what it can losslessly (or sometimes in a lossy way, if clearly indicated for example by a different path) create from the outputs of the program earlier in the pipe…

Open ##2406399