Replies: 1 comment
-
|
Thanks — agreed, I want to ship the parse-and-spawn route in the next release. Tracking in #232. Quick summary of why the "just allow chaining" path doesn't work cleanly: the four shells we'd hand the string to disagree.
PowerShell 5.1 is still the default on Windows 10/11, so any path that relies on the shell to parse Plan in #232:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
It very common to the model to try to pipe commands eg.
seq 10 | grep 5. But as is now it returns to the model a message saying it isn't allowed, than the model have to do some separated calls on those tools.I'm guessing it's related to some security in mind. But by the other side I know the models are really good on solving problems by unix commands pipelining/chaining, so limiting it may be limiting the model performance on tasks.
I was thinking about, if not allowing it to run chained commands, than we should work on something to parse the chained commands and than spawn the subprocess and connect their input output ourself. This would allow us to get some better approvals, for example, always allow grep even on loops and so on, something that claude interprets as brand new commands to get allowed.
But probably just allowing to chain commands would be the best quick win.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions