Cue Does It All, but Can It Literate?

Please, please - just link to the actual "CUE" project. Not everyone has heard of your favourite thing. The first reference to `CUE` should be a hyperlink.

For other people: I'm pretty sure the author is talking about https://cuelang.org/

Is there anyone out there that has actually, in the real world, realized CUE's promise of bundling type safety + data/configuration + task running in such a way that does not require wrapping it in shell scripts? Can you set up your CI/CD pipelines so that it's literally just invoking some cue cmd, and have that cmd invocation be reasonably portable?

The problem is, once you have to wrap CUE, the loss of flexibility within a special-purpose language like CUE is enough for people to ask why not just bother writing the scripts in a general purpose language with better ecosystem support. And that's a hard sell in corporate environments, even ones that find benefit in type safe languages in general, because they can just pick a general purpose language with a static type checker.

Maybe it's unfair, unhelpful or overdone to call out llmisms, but if OP is reading this I stopped reading pretty quickly as a result of things like:

> [CUE] does not just hold the text; it validates that the pieces actually fit. It ensures that the code in your explanation is the exact same code in your final build. It is like having a Lego set where the bricks refuse to click if you are building something structurally unsound.

And that's despite having a passing interest in both cue and LP