5 ms·
First, I think it's a case of momentum. All the scripts are written in shells that are distributed by default in most distros. sh, bash, etc. I write lots of sc
by delinka 9y ago
First, I think it's a case of momentum. All the scripts are written in shells that are distributed by default in most distros. sh, bash, etc. I write lots of scripts for fish, and I can't convince my co-workers to install fish to run my scripts. They already have bash, they already know bash, etc.
Second, I was recently chided by another fish user for writing fish scripts: "you're using it wrong" was the sentiment. The argument was it's a shell intended to be interactive, but extendable. I don't know how pervasive this line of thinking is, but who's going to learn all about their shell if they're not supposed to write scripts in its language?
- aerique 9y agoI've been using fish for years but I never write scripts in it. What's the point? There's sh which is the most portable. Why write scripts in anything else but an actual programming language when things get more complex?
- msla 9y agoThe point is the compose-save-edit cycle: Compose the script in the shell, save it to a file, and then, maybe, edit it to add better argument handling or support for corner cases you didn't consider in the interactive environment.