4 ms·

> So the massive drawback of fish is it's incompatible with bash (and other shells people use). This drawback is also its advantage, as it doesn't need to repe

> So the massive drawback of fish is it's incompatible with bash (and other shells people use). This drawback is also its advantage, as it doesn't need to repeat all the Bourne-ish problems. (You seem to like this :-), just pointing it out for the others.) I think people who are interested in how they use the command line will not have a problem to learn two shells, fish for the personal use and something Bourne-ish for scripts that might run on other machines, or by other users.

gnubison 5y ago
The Bourne shell certainly has problems, but IMHO fish should have stuck with POSIX syntax when it's "good enough" (TM). Stuff like $(code) vs (code) makes Fish feel like it just wants to be different. Things I think are big problems: * Needing to quote practically everything * Needing to remember if/fi, case/esac, while/do/done, for/in/do/done, etc.