Unix Shell Programming: The Next 50 Years [pdf]
The researchers main concerns (making shell programs perform better, especially by better leveraging the parallel computing resources of supercomputing environments), but they do give a nod to stuff I care more about (usability and breaking out of the limits imposed by extant terminal emulator standards).<p>I hope that this jump starts a bit more research into shell languages. Maybe the veneer of authority given by papers suggesting various improvements will help draw people to next-generation shells that take up those improvements and advertise that.<p>If you were not aware, PowerShell has inspired a whole generation of next-generation shells built around structured pipelines, and they&#x27;re very exciting. My personal favorite is Elvish, which also draws much inspiration from Fish, a lovely &#x27;old-fashioned&#x27; (text-only pipeline) shell with a strong emphasis on interactivity and ease of use. One thing that makes Elvish special besides its ambition to be a pleasant and useful general-purpose programming language is its portability: it&#x27;s typically distributed as a single static binary, and it even has native support for Windows.<p>When I think of &#x27;the future of the shell&#x27;, I absolutely think of Elvish, namely with respect to:<p><pre><code>  * better portability
  * high aims as a &#x27;real&#x27; programming language
  * built-in static checks where possible (for now just syntax, I think, but a more complete type system is on the roadmap)
  * sophisticated and responsive interactive experience out of the box
  * structured pipelines, structured pipelines, structured pipelines
</code></pre>
To me, the performance issues the authors address are secondary to what I&#x27;ve enumerated above. But they&#x27;re right that the fundamentals of the shell are great as well as overdue for some innovation.