[Toybox] Shell Compatibility Reports from Oils - ~800 tests passing

[Rob Landley]

On 6/26/25 23:33, Andy Chu wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> I compared many shells for bash compatibility, including toysh:
> 
> https://pages.oils.pub/spec-compat/2025-06-26/renamed-tmp/spec/compat/TOP.html
> 
> toysh passes 809 tests, out of ~2200:
> 
> https://pages.oils.pub/spec-compat/2025-06-26/renamed-tmp/spec/compat/PASSING.html
> 
> What's the motivation for this?  Well, two months ago, I thought that
> toysh and OSH (part of https://oils.pub/ ) were the only projects
> aiming for bash compatibility.
> 
> But then I learned there are TWO shells in Rust aiming at bash
> compatibility, both started in 2022 - in this thread
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43908368
> 
> So I thought you may be interested in this.
> 
> A few years ago I transcribed some tests from toybox, so thanks for that:
> 
> https://pages.oils.pub/spec-compat/2025-06-26/renamed-tmp/spec/compat/toysh.html

FYI, notes.html is a symlink to the current year, the stable link is 
http://landley.net/notes-2020.html#23-04-2020

I have SO many back blog entries I need to re-read and fish tests out 
of. Going back to the 2019 relaunch (commit 7fceed5f75c9) which... looks 
like the first blog entry about the relaunch was 
http://landley.net/notes-2019.html#02-06-2019 . I have SO many todo 
items, and that one's a meta todo item to go produce more todo items.

People talk about "test driven design" but I don't think they usually 
mean "oh yeah, and it needs to do THIS too" and piling up a zillion todo 
items as tests that don't pass yet, then going in and adding $BROKEN 
annotations because the test suite's useless at actually testing the 
current code...

(Coding is easy. Figuring out what it's supposed to DO has always been 
the hard part.)

Rob