And yet most of the time I see bash being used for the same kind of automation that you think is good for perl/python.
And not because bash is good, but because it is what people know (since they use it interactively) and because it is installed everywhere.
So if someone had a tool that was installed everywhere, and used interactively, that could also be used to create more robust automation tasks, that seems like a win to me.
It depends on how complex the automation is. I'd no doubt use a pipeline in places where you'd use perl/python.
As for interactive use and robust automation, Bash isn't as bad as you'd think. The reason I'd go to python is because of script complexity, not lack of robustness.
And not because bash is good, but because it is what people know (since they use it interactively) and because it is installed everywhere.
So if someone had a tool that was installed everywhere, and used interactively, that could also be used to create more robust automation tasks, that seems like a win to me.