3 ms·

Bah.... Use Fish

• guard-of-terra 10y ago
  I'm pretty sure it's possible to configure fish, but I don't feel any need to. That's the good part - works out of box. However I don't like their new shell syntax, especially env vars handling. Doubt it's configurable.
  • shakna 10y ago
    One of the deep concepts of fish is that everything is a function. So while you can't do "PATH=$PATH", you could easily make a function that parses that for you, and have "env PATH=$PATH". It's a limitation. However, it does mean that instead of something like Bash's insanity around P1 when you want a contextual prompt, fish_prompt is a function, with all the beauty of ifs, fors, and whiles spread out in an easy to read language. Fish can be hit or miss, but it feels like Lua for the shell, to me.
• wtbob 10y ago
  Meh, fish seems to be gratuitously incompatible with sh/bash/zsh. In my experience it seems to be preferred by the sort of person who uses macOS and doesn't use vi or emacs.
  • Zardoz84 10y ago
    I use vim & neovim :P on kUbuntu. Also, I don't notice that any script on bash stooped working because my main shell is fish.
  • atemerev 10y ago
    ...you are saying it as if it was a bad thing or something.
• qznc 10y ago
  I use and love fish, but zsh completion is more powerful.