Andrew Bradley

Ok, in that case, I'm fine with either, it's equally easy to use both.

I'm hitting an issue where I can't set a different `script-interpreter` on Windows. My use-case is using `busybox sh` on Window, `sh` on all other platforms. Context: https://github.com/casey/just/issues/2671#issuecomment-2740855235 I want...

> Nix-shell interprets the extra shebang lines: Is this extra shebang line necessary for your use-case? It seems like it's a workaround for the limitations of the Linux kernel's shebang...

> `error: path '/home/me/example/{{shell_nix}}' does not exist` > `error: Expected keyword `x` but found identifier `shell_nix`` This means that you cannot use interpolation syntax nor reference variables within `[script()]`; is...

> ...in fact the only interpreters I know if that will fail without the correct extension is `cmd.exe` and PowerShell. Noting for completeness: @linux-china mentioned the variety of extensions in...

> The issue is that the operating system allows for multiple shebangs (although it only interprets the first shebang) and that nix-shell makes use of that allowance by interpreting any...

> I was also hoping for that recipe to work, but nix-shell has other ideas: I see, that clears up my confusion, thanks. > ...syntax highlighting works by default with...

Yeah, any of those options work for me: `COMPONENT_SEPARATOR`, `COMPONENT_SEP`, `DIR_SEP`.

> Implementing this has some subtleties (e.g. what should happen if multiple source directories are re-written to a single target directory) and will likely be non-trivial to implement. To implement...

Is this because contiguous spans of comments are all grouped together, so the help system considers the shebang and the synopsis to be the same comment?