Open lread opened 2 years ago
Yea, I agree. On the one hand, we could just execute the script as like a shell script using something like -c
, but that would break use cases like opening a repl and typing into it. I can't think of a better extension than .txt
and it does seem more appropriate than .sh
. I guess the one downside is that you lose syntax highlighting in your editor if it's a .txt
file.
Yeah, true.
The README could show play examples as .txt
but include a sentence on why and mention syntax highlighting.
Play scripts are not shell scripts. We might be misleading users by using
.sh
as a filename extension for these files in our examples.I'm thinking
.txt
might be a better filename extension?We are playing text to the terminal.