Daniel Shimon

I understand what you're saying but it still doesn't feel very helpful. I'm talking of course only about subprocesses which are substituted inside another command, in which case I can't...

> I do like to keep an open mind, though! So I can be convinced away from the above opinions. Good to hear! I was fearing this is a dead...

Another option is to only have `$()` strip the trailing newlines, while `!()` doesn't. This way `$()` is robust for day-to-day command substitution but for full accuracy one can use...

Yeah I agree about not adding more syntax in this area

> I like this logic when I thought about users from bash world and fast diving into xonsh. Looks consistent. It's not just for users coming from a different shell,...

@anki-code if I understand correctly with your suggestion `$()` isn't modal? Meaning `$()` always returns the rstripped output, and `!()` returns the complete output in subprocess mode and a CommandPipeline...

@scopatz In this suggestion, the `!()` operator doesn't really **act** differently wrt to the current mode, it just returns a helpful thing in subprocess mode and returns the complete `CommandPipeline`...

@anki-code very nice! Can you clarify that the behavior should be `.rstrip('\n)` like in other shells? Also can you add the `make - j $(nproc)` example?

I agree we should improve the efficiency of the discussion, and document all the arguments in a centralized way. Following what you guys said, since this is such a major...

Hi @adqm, thanks for the detailed explanation! A few questions: > I think it makes the most sense for $(...) to return a string with trailing newline stripped 1. Do...