The reason for choosing higher level constructs is token use. We certainly reduce the number of tokens by using a shell like command language, But of course that also reduces expressiveness.
I've been meaning to get round to Plan 9 style where the LLM reads and writes from files rather than running commands. I'm not sure whether that's going to be more useful than just running commands. is for an end user because they only have to think about one paradigm - reading/writing files.
> In the end I want to drop objects into context with exposed methods and it knows the type and what is callable on they type.
And this:
> I'm imagining something more like Rexx with quite high level commands. But that certainly blurs the line between programming language and shell.
It really sounds like you're trying to reinvent powershell.
A shell A Scripting language Everything is a self describing object Piped on the shell With exposed methods to call
I am hoping something like CEL (with verifiable runtime guarantees) but the syntax being a subset of Python.
Think of all the new yachts our mega-rich tech-bros could have by doing this!
Thanks, most of the times when I do that people tell me to stop being silly and stop saying nonsense.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Someone said it was a creative comment.
I blew air through my nose, too,
but let’s be real.