There are a couple of problems with that design. Firstly, if the program crashes for any reason, you don’t have a shell to fall back on, unless you run the debugger as your shell, like ITS did back in the 1960s. Secondly, you can’t have more than one job running at the same time, or even any suspended jobs. And even ITS (again) has subjobs.
If your shell crashes, same problem. And the shell is a bigger program. This issue seems pretty orthogonal. Again, I was never saying this is a better way to design a shell for everyday use, unless maybe with a lot of complementary design decisions changed to go with it.
> Secondly
Why couldn't you spawn jobs like `& do-the-job` in this style? Admittedly I don't remember much about Unix job handling.
