all 18 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That's what I currently use but I've tested fsh a little and was potentially looking to move. I just have to pull the trigger and see if I regret it or not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    I went from bash to zsh to fish.

    1. I understood bash. Manual is good, searchable, understandable.
    2. I never understood zsh. Manual is split up in several different man pages, very annoying to find what you're looking for. I never ever understood what I was doing, config wise. Just blindly following convoluted how-to's.
    3. With fish, I finally understand every aspect of my shell again, and it's like 10x simpler than bash. Can be learned completely within 30 minutes or so.

    Highly recommend the switch.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Love me some Fish 😊

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Fish looks cool, but I decided to settle on ble.sh for compatibility reasons. This one deserves some attention too. For me the main motivation was history-based autocomplete.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    that's a command line editor tho fish is a shell?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago*

    Blesh adds a lot of functionality that makes bash feel + act like a fancier neoshell, while keeping the same syntax. Also includes a pre-exec hook, which vanilla bash notably lacks.

    Highly recommend.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    reject POSIX, embrace nushell

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    Fish isn't POSIX...

    That said, I tried nushell a couple times and it's pretty cool. Just a big hurdle for right now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    yeah, but they did reverse course on ; and vs && to be more POSIX compatible, which is a decision i understand but don’t agree with

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Hmm, where did you hear that? I'm reading the manual through relevant parts but I can't find anything regarding those combiners and POSIX compliancy.

    Do you have a link perhaps?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    it was years ago. they used to not support &&, but they added it so people could paste commands into the terminal

    i think this is the PR from 8 years ago 👴: https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/issues/4620

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Oh-my-bash. All of the upsides. None of the down

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment