I HIGHLY recommend using bash and zsh as posix-compliant shells at the beginning, then if you want something different; you can use whatever the hell you want. Nushell, fish, etc.

Okay so first there was Unix. It was semi Open Source and a bunch of companies were making different versions that were becoming increasingly incompatible. That is why POSIX was created, it standardizes major parts of Unix. Linux is a Unix like operating system, meaning it functions similarly but doesn’t share any code. One thing that POSIX standardizes is the shell meaning there’s a standard how a loop works etc. Most shell on Linux like bash and zsh are POSIX compliant but some (like fish aren’t). This means a command that works one way in bash might work differently in fish. Basic stuff is mostly the same in my experience so if you’re not having any problems you shouldn’t worry about being POSIX compliant. If you want most of the same stuff but POSIX compliant checkout zsh. Fish provides documentation for adjusting your commands so I’d just ignore it until you run into a problem and then take a look at the docks

"POSIX compliant shells" means shells that work with... Fuck how do I even describe this simplistically? A lot of scripts are ran by a program named "sh". Sometimes it is bash, sometimes dash, but they're all POSIX compliant which means they've got some standard things that most people expect.

Using a non POSIX compliant shells will be okay, because programs trying to use "sh" will still work (unless you set something up wrong, which you'd probably have to go out if your way to do, so you're probably fine).

Genuinely the only downside to using a non POSIX compliant shell is that you won't learn the standard stuff so you won't be as good at writing and reading scripts. It's truly not too big of a deal. Fish (non POSIX compliant) is what Arch (or at least Cachy) used by default. It's been great. The defaults are useful. To get a similar experience with POSIX shells I typically have to use zsh with oh-my-zsh and some plugins. Fish does it all out of the box.

So don't worry about it!

zsh with oh-my-zsh addon can do the same amount of pretty colours and qol stuff, with the addition of being POSIX compliant. Not that fish is bad or anything, but you don't want additional troubles with random incompatibility on top of the usual learning curve.

Fixed in fish 4.0 :)

yeah, and ripgrep with regex operators.

#!/usr/bin/env bash

Then you're just running bash scripts with bash. You're not running bash scripts with fish.

Chaotic lawful.

I love my bash-isms.

POSIX tryanny? Lmao

Generally, people mix the two, so you have to use context. I think, however, your take is correct. I think the post is meant to give a bit of a rebellious vibe, so that may be why they chose this phrasing.

"non-POSIX compliant" = compliant with non-POSIX (whatever "non-POSIX" may be)

"POSIX non-compliant" = not compliant with POSIX

The best way to say what OP did would be a simple "not POSIX compliant". Looking back, that's exactly what was said in the post. The meme itself is, unfortunately a different story.

Posix non-compliant was used in the meme because the author wanted to save on words in the puchline. "Using a shell not POSIX compliant" lacks a few words and is syntactically incorrect. "Using a POSIX non-compliant shell" saves on words, and is syntactically correct, but makes the sentence more complex.

All in all, the "non-" prefix is a bit finicky in english and can usually be avoided.

While using the fish shell you can just type 'help', and it'll pull up an offline web page with their manuals and guides. But to be honest, I dont really use fish for anything but the fancy colors and auto-completion lol. Also fish 🐟 :)

I'd rather use cash