phronmophobic
It is probably misleading to give play scripts an .sh extension
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.
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.