It also offers a better history UX. For example, if you issued, make .. && make foobar && make .. and you wanted to just run 'make foobar' again you'd search

It also offers a better history UX. For example, if you issued, make .. && make foobar && make .. and you wanted to just run 'make foobar' again you'd search your history for the last foobar invocation, and be required to do some editing. With nq this wouldn't be necessary. It's also not clear to me if nq has '&&' or ';' semantics in the event a command fails. I suspect it's ';'. Clever and fun tool but unlikely I'll adopt it.